Country’s looking sortable. Hillary’s got to hit that ayahuasca back sooner than later or she won’t be able to make Rand Paul into her XO girl. Government’s not the attractive target it has been for registering often or all that well as constitutional or democracy. There are enough programming languages to sort it; a stack that resolves the differences will run soon enough.
For one, she has said she’s not running.
Right, but perhaps like many other politicians before her, she’ll change her mind down the road. She has said she’s not running in the next election, but there’s certainly hope she’ll do it later and I don’t subscribe to the media narrative that the public should only focus on presidential elections once they’re a year or two away.
I mean, that’s crazy to me. The public puts more time into education, etc. than finding and vetting the right people to run the entire country. That needs to change.
Secondly, she’s already been warned about not criticizing Democrat insiders.
Ha… who hasn’t? But, seriously, I doubt anyone is going to get elected President without at least pandering to the current power structure. Otherwise, they’d just as soon put a bullet in your head.
I’m not convinced that Warren would be the left-leaning miracle people are hoping for, but I think she would certainly be many steps above Hillary Clinton in fighting the good fight.
It’s also no secret that Warren backs Clinton for this upcoming election, but I’m not sure she really has any other choice at this point.
If by some strange happenstance she does get in, which I believe she never will, because of right leaning Democratic voters
While Obama was full of shit, he did run on a fairly left-leaning platform and that’s what people voted for (and that’s why so many are angry and disillusioned with him now). One of the few good things to come out of Obama’s initial election was that it clearly showed that there really are plenty of left-leaning voters out there. We just haven’t found a politician who is truly left-leaning once they hit office.
The truth of the matter is despite the corporate media who continuously tries to convince all of us that the overwhelming majority of Americans are right-leaning - we are a mostly left-leaning nation and Obama’s election numbers proved it.
how much could she accomplish?
Plenty if the American public stops screwing up and not voting midterms. Even if Obama wanted to push a leftwing agenda, he couldn’t because the American public made a blunder of epic proportions… they didn’t put in enough liberal Democrats (not bluedogs) and oust enough Republicans to thwart filibusters.
If the American public continues this blunder again, I agree… we’re probably screwed almost no matter which Democrat or Independent we elect.
I really think what is needed is an alternative party, who, no question, will lose, but who has fresh ideas outside of the system. I don’t know how we go about doing that. … With the big money system in place, no one will see the national stage, unless they sign over their souls. Sorry, I’m just very disheartened, and I do need some inspiration and perhaps more sleep.
Give it a few years. Don’t despair, there’s feverish work being done as we speak to utilize the Internet to bring about new blood from outside the system via grassroots efforts. This will happen whether Net Neutrality becomes a thing of the past or not. Expect announcements before November.
As far as my angle goes, my current focus is working with some private security forces to help protect outsider candidates from state-political spying, corporate spying, state sabotage and even assassination. Sound nuts, I know, but that’s the world we live in today within The Land of the Free, Inc.
It’s long term stuff, but one thing is for sure, it’ll be even further long term if Americans screw the pooch and keep allowing more Republicans into office in the midterms. The same Republicans that have gerrymandering and voter suppression down to a science to thwart Democratic voters also thwarts Independent, third party voters.
3 Likes
But my intent was to express a belief that civil (or even highly uncivil) disobedience was much more likely to generate movement than engaging the powers that be in a collaborative effort (which I took to be the meaning of openfly’s post).
I think perhaps all three are in order. Civil disobedience, highly uncivil disobedience (that doesn’t involve violence/killing) and collaborative efforts as well.
Disruption on an unprecedented scale is what will drive change. Though I suspect the probable motive force will be economic pain.
I agree. Some of the corporatists are split on the mass surveillance crap at least. Those divisions are being exploited as we speak. It’s also why it’s a good idea to continue to force corporations to take sides on issues. If they want to be like “people”, we can use that to our advantage and get them to scrap with each other for our own ends.
Personally, I think Apple can kick the living shit out of Chick-fil-A anyway. 
2 Likes
What I was trying to say is that both issues are a magnet for moonbats.
Hankerin’ to get fooled again, Bunky??
"The reason why he’s in Russia is that the United States revoked his passport when he was transiting through there. "
This is a lie. “The United States canceled Snowden’s passport before he left Hong Kong on a flight to Moscow on June 23.” - LA Times, June 30, 2013
To print this Kremlin manufactured lie and then call it “fact checking”? For shame!
He was travelling under Ecuadoran papers to Ecuador. That meant passing through Cuba, and Cuba was under considerable pressure to forbid that (so they did). Ecuador revoked the papers within a week, I’d imagine under similar pressure. Then there was the incident of Evo Morales’ plane (which was a violation of international law)…
The USA has not behaved well throughout this whole affair, and that is not a Kremlin-manufactured lie.
1 Like
“Cuba was under considerable pressure to forbid that (so they did)”
Fidel Castro says it is a “lie” and a “libel” that Cuba ever would have denied boarding for Snowden.
Source:
“Fidel Castro labels libelous report Cuba blocked Snowden travel”, Reuters, August 28, 2013
Here’s another lie for you: that Snowden never met Russian officials in Hong Kong before leaving HK for Moscow. Kommersant broke the news and on August 28 Greenwald called the Kommersant story “fabricated”, but just days later on TV Putin himself (you cannot tell the top guy what he has to stay to keep the story straight) let it slip that Snowden had, indeed, been in contact with Russian diplomats in Hong Kong. What was he discussing with him? No permission is needed if passing thru Russia within 24 hours. Permission is needed to NOT pass through.
And let’s not forget Assage’s acknowledgement that he always thought Russia was best for Snowden.
A source identified as “close to the [American] State Department” confirmed that Cuba was among a number of countries asked by the US not to provide assistance to Mr Snowden.
From the Independent 27/8/13 Edward Snowden ‘contacted’ Russians two days before arrival in Moscow. Naturally enough Fidel would state otherwise - the USA is not precisely his friend, and I rather doubt they asked nicely, but his position wouldn’t fare too well if it was known he buckled under pressure.
Be that as it may, permission is certainly wise to obtain if you have temporary papers from a 3rd party and it’s known that your country has revoked your passport, don’t you think?
I repeat, the USA has behaved very poorly throughout all this, and for what? Essentially to try to hide government malfeasance - you’ve got an internal surveillance system that would give the Stasi wet dreams.
This topic was automatically closed after 5 days. New replies are no longer allowed.
