hightor
 
  3  
Reply Tue 26 Nov, 2019 08:22 am
@hightor,
Actually, when you look at the video, Greenwald was right in Nunes's face repeatedly shouting "Coward!" at him and tried to hit him after the two were separated. Bolsonaro's Brazil does suck but Greenwald isn't universally loved and respected in his adopted country:
Elisa De Oliveira wrote:
Furthermore, many Brazilians are upset that Greenwald published stolen material (phone conversations) from a then Federal Judge that is for many a hero. This anger toward Greenwald has less to do with Bolsonaro and more to do with the fact that Greenwald is not respecting Brazilian law. Now let's imagine if a Brazilian journalist had got together with American hackers and published stolen phone conversation from an American Federal judge! Just because GG is called a journalist and won a Pulitzer prize he is not above the law. It is illegal in Brazil to listen to private conversation. Nunes and millions of Brazilians are outraged with what Greenwald is doing and have asked authorities to either arrest or extradited him, not because people who support Bolsonaro are "fascists" but because Greenwald did something that is against the law. This article is an exercise in distortion.

And for a little balance:
Chris Pining wrote:
Oh, please. Greenwald and Assange have done everything in their power to tear down the liberal world order. Compared to his rhetoric, the GOP’s attacks on the Democratic Party look tame. He dismisses Russian interference in electoral politics as a fantasy of the American left and opposes attempts to hold Trump accountable for flagrant abuse of office. He sees no difference between Hillary and Putin, Obama and Assad, Democrats and Republicans. He’s the brave truth-teller on Tucker Carlson taking his supposed side to task. (Remember, Greenwald used to be openly libertarian. He started masquerading as a progressive during the Obama administration so as not to seem like another conservative reactionary.) He wanted Trump to win, though he likes to pretend otherwise. But Trump has encouraged rightwing populists across the globe, including Greenwald’s adopted home country. Looks like the chickens are coming home to roost. At least he’ll be safe in his gated community, figuratively and literally high above the city’s destitute, from which he funds his young husband’s political career.

(quotes are from the comments in the sidebar — there are complimentary ones as well)
revelette3
 
  2  
Reply Tue 26 Nov, 2019 10:01 am
@blatham,
For my part, worse than supporting Brown over Warren, he supported McConnel. No excuse can be given; I know McConnel does not support stronger gun laws and never has. Nor has McCain and perhaps others. If wants to throw his money around, I am sure Amy McGrath wouldn't mind where it comes from.

Quote:
“The fact that Bloomberg was willing to throw his money into it gave Toomey a talking point to appeal to suburban voters in Philly, and ultimately one of the reasons we lost is that he outperformed Donald Trump in the Philly suburbs,” said Mike Mikus, McGinty’s former campaign manager. “I’m certain his hand in giving Mitch McConnell a majority in the Senate will be remembered by a lot of Democratic voters.
hightor
 
  2  
Reply Tue 26 Nov, 2019 12:10 pm
Sure, it's fine for Michael Harriot to call Pete Buttigieg "a lying MF"; it's easy. If someone's different from you and has a different perspective then, by the jesus, you know he's got to be a lying MF. But, hey, what's this? Someone is accusing Michael Harriot of being a liar — and a "sellout".

I think I'll rely on my own judgment to assess Mayor Buttigieg's qualifications — and Michael Harriot's character — instead of relying on bias-confirming conclusions and facile smears that can too easily be found on the web.
0 Replies
 
coldjoint
 
  0  
Reply Tue 26 Nov, 2019 01:12 pm
Quote:
Obama ‘Would Speak Up to Stop’ Bernie Sanders if He Were Getting the Nomination, Politico Reports

Will anyone listen? Yes they probably will.
Quote:
“There is one potential exception: Back when Sanders seemed like more of a threat than he does now, Obama said privately that if Bernie were running away with the nomination, Obama would speak up to stop him,” Lizza continued, adding, however, that “a spokesperson for Obama pointed out that Obama recently said he would support and campaign for whoever the Democratic nominee is.”

https://www.mediaite.com/politics/obama-would-speak-up-to-stop-bernie-sanders-if-he-were-getting-the-nomination-politico-reports/
0 Replies
 
hightor
 
  2  
Reply Tue 26 Nov, 2019 02:27 pm
More quicksand:

Minority Voters Chafe as Democratic Candidates Abandon Charter Schools

The front-runners for the presidential nomination are moving away from the charter school movement, and black and Latino families ask why their concerns are lost.

Quote:
ATLANTA — The night before Democratic presidential candidates took to a debate stage here last week, black and Latino charter school parents and supporters gathered in a bland hotel conference room nearby to make signs they hoped would get the politicians’ attention.

“Charter schools = self-determination,” one sign read. “Black Democrats want charters!” another blared.

At issue is the delicate politics of race and education. For more than two decades, Democrats have largely backed public charter schools as part of a compromise to deliver black and Latino families a way out of failing district schools. Charters were embraced as an alternative to the taxpayer-funded vouchers for private-school tuition supported by Republicans, who were using the issue to woo minority voters.

But this year, in a major shift, the leading Democratic candidates are backing away from charter schools, and siding with the teachers’ unions that oppose their expansion. And that has left some black and Latino families feeling betrayed.

(...)

nyt
0 Replies
 
Lash
 
  1  
Reply Tue 26 Nov, 2019 02:58 pm
@snood,
He could fund the DNC into the next decade to make their delegates choose him.
Sturgis
 
  4  
Reply Tue 26 Nov, 2019 03:11 pm
@blatham,
The truth of the matter here is, Bloomberg is a switcher. He goes from one political group to another more often than Trump sees his own toes.

As the NYC Mayor he won 3 times. Once as a Republican, once as an Independent and then in his last attempt at never leaving, he said he was a Democrat. (this was after he managed to get the NYC City Council to overturn term limits - which voters had twice approved). Along with his third straight win, he had to look at the final results, wherein the voters decided once more, for term limits.
Lash
 
  1  
Reply Tue 26 Nov, 2019 03:50 pm
Yo, @izzythepush

https://amp.theguardian.com/politics/2019/nov/26/labour-gets-support-from-bernie-sanders-campaigners-in-us?__twitter_impression=true

Labour gets support from Bernie Sanders campaigners in US
Volunteers for the US presidential hopeful run sessions for Momentum activists
Kate Proctor
Tue 26 Nov 2019 14.34 EST
Share on FacebookShare on TwitterShare via Email
Campaigners for US presidential hopeful Bernie Sanders have been lending their support to the Labour party, running phone-banking sessions from New York ahead of the general election.
The city’s branch of Labour International has been working with the Democratic Socialists of America (DSA), who have been calling British campaigners with tips on how to encourage people to register to vote and cast a ballot for Labour at the December poll.
The DSA endorses and campaigns for Sanders, who is running to be the Democratic presidential candidate for a second time after losing out to Hillary Clinton in 2016.

A spokesperson for Momentum, the grassroots Labour campaign group, said: “This is part of a growing relationship between Bernie, DSA activists and Momentum and Labour members abroad that has included exchanges between the nurses’ unions of the US and the UK to campaign on public health in the US.
“Many Labour International and Momentum members have been volunteers on Sanders’ campaign and so the favour’s being returned.”
Canvassing sessions run by the US volunteers for Momentum campaigners in the UK on Saturdays are an attempt to support grassroots activism and turn out the vote for Labour.
Campaigners from Sanders’ team have previously run election training sessions for activists working on Corbyn’s 2017 election run to try to help direct the huge volume of volunteers the organisation attracts to the right constituencies. They have also shared digital campaigning methods.
coldjoint
 
  -1  
Reply Tue 26 Nov, 2019 04:09 pm
https://media.townhall.com/Townhall/Car/b/afb112419dAPR20191123054508.jpg
0 Replies
 
oralloy
 
  -2  
Reply Tue 26 Nov, 2019 09:09 pm
@Sturgis,
Sturgis wrote:
Perhaps because he is aware that nuclear weapons are actually more dangerous than beneficial.

They aren't more dangerous than beneficial. We depend on nuclear weapons to keep the bad guys at bay.
0 Replies
 
blatham
 
  2  
Reply Wed 27 Nov, 2019 03:32 am
@snood,
Quote:
pride and ego

That matches hightor's post above yours. There was a great line in Sleeper where Woody, having been frozen then awakened by scientists in the future, is being grilled by those scientists for information on historical facts from Woody's lifetime. In one case, he's shown a photograph of Norman Mailer. Woody described him as "a great writer who left his ego to the Harvard Medical School"

That's clearly a looming factor in Bloomberg's noggin. And he's wealthy enough that he could toss a billion dollars at this effort and not miss that money even a bit. But does he imagine he could win the Dem nomination? Maybe he's that warped by self-regard. I gather the people who have been feeding his ego are mainly the Wall Street crowd. What are they thinking? Do anything/everything that might damage Sanders and Warren? I'm sure that's the case.

It's all rather odd. But the theme running through all of this is the notion that people with a LOT of money are the proper rulers of the lesser people.

0 Replies
 
blatham
 
  1  
Reply Wed 27 Nov, 2019 03:38 am
@hightor,
Yeah. I watched the interaction between the two men and Greenwald's behavior was not nearly as innocent as his later statements/cries suggest.

I don't know what has happened to the guy. Neither does Joan Walsh who hired him at Salon and who'd been a friend for decades.
0 Replies
 
blatham
 
  1  
Reply Wed 27 Nov, 2019 03:43 am
@revelette3,
Yeah. Toomey is another flashing red light. One factor I'm curious about is the prior relationship between Bloomberg and Trump. Anyone familiar with this?
0 Replies
 
blatham
 
  0  
Reply Wed 27 Nov, 2019 03:53 am
@Lash,
Quote:
He could fund the DNC into the next decade to make their delegates choose him.
They can get funding without him as they've done throughout the past. And pushing him forward would be self-defeating. It ain't going to happen or even be considered.
blatham
 
  2  
Reply Wed 27 Nov, 2019 03:56 am
@Sturgis,
Quote:
he managed to get the NYC City Council to overturn term limits
Another piece of evidence confirming his limitless self-regard.
0 Replies
 
Lash
 
  2  
Reply Wed 27 Nov, 2019 03:58 am
@blatham,
Do you know how funding has been going for the DNC in the last 6 or 7 years? Are you aware that Hillary Clinton was able to take over the DNC precisely because they were floundering financially and she infused them with her own money—and took the reins?

I don’t know which Dark Lord is running them now in a similar deal, but where they get their money is widely known to be very sketchy and attached to big strings.

https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.pbs.org/newshour/amp/show/donna-brazile-bailing-out-dnc-gave-clinton-campaign-control-made-my-job-impossible
Lash
 
  1  
Reply Wed 27 Nov, 2019 04:04 am
@blatham,
blatham wrote:

Quote:
He could fund the DNC into the next decade to make their delegates choose him.
They can get funding without him as they've done throughout the past. And pushing him forward would be self-defeating. It ain't going to happen or even be considered.


You don’t seem to know fundamental facts about the DNC.

https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.bloomberg.com/amp/news/articles/2019-06-13/democrats-2020-odds-against-trump-clouded-by-party-finances
Lash
 
  1  
Reply Wed 27 Nov, 2019 04:08 am
@blatham,
The DNC money problem has been going on for a while.

https://www.google.com/amp/s/fortune.com/2013/09/30/the-dnc-is-nearly-broke/amp/

THE DNC IS NEARLY BROKE
2013

Brand X
 
  1  
Reply Wed 27 Nov, 2019 04:25 am
Michael Tracey

Verified account

@mtracey
8h8 hours ago
More
Bloomberg said today: "I will be the only candidate in this race who isn't corruptible." Strange definition of "corruptibility." He may not be accepting cash bribes, but some would argue that being Wall Street's chief data vendor for several decades is kinda "corrupting"
blatham
 
  1  
Reply Wed 27 Nov, 2019 05:12 am
@Lash,
Quote:
Are you aware that Hillary Clinton was able to take over the DNC precisely because they were floundering financially and she infused them with her own money—and took the reins?
I'm a tad surprised to find you forwarding Brazille as a voice of truth and accuracy. Would you support everything else she says here? You know, Russian hacking and all?

The only relevant comment she makes in the piece you reference is:
Quote:
And the decision by the Clinton campaign to help bail out the DNC gave them control over three important departments.

A more thorough voicing of Brazille's charges can be found Here

Quote:
...I discussed the fundraising agreement that each of the candidates had signed. Bernie was familiar with it, but he and his staff ignored it. They had their own way of raising money through small donations. I described how Hillary’s campaign had taken it another step.

I told Bernie I had found Hillary’s Joint Fundraising Agreement. I explained that the cancer was that she had exerted this control of the party long before she became its nominee. Had I known this, I never would have accepted the interim chair position, but here we were with only weeks before the election.

Bernie took this stoically. He did not yell or express outrage. Instead he asked me what I thought Hillary’s chances were...


I'm not terribly familiar with this whole story but the Politico piece fleshes it out. That is, it fleshes out Brazille's take. I have no reason to doubt it but I also would want to hear contesting accounts from others.

Both the DNC and RNC burn through a lot of money particularly as elections approach. Given that the DNC was $2 million in the hole, some remedy had to be found. It seems the Clinton move to fill that hole would in itself be fine. The complain from Brazille was that the Clinton people then leveraged some level of control over operations and personnel prior to the nomination being finalized. Again, if accurate, that looks to me (as poorly educated on these operations and how either party has done things in the past) as an ethical failing. But as this account reflects, this was not just a campaign to thwart Sanders but a broad effort to reorganize DNC operations broadly and down to the state level (what monies should go where? Who best to fill various positions to forward Dem electoral goals up and down? etc).
Quote:
I don’t know which Dark Lord is running them now in a similar deal, but where they get their money is widely known to be very sketchy and attached to big strings.
That's a completely silly take on these matters. Elections, not to mention daily on-going operations of the DNC and RNC, are hugely expensive. Money has to keep coming from somewhere and both get it where they can. That's fine (not really, electoral finance reform is critical, of course) so long as there's no specific quid pro quo involved. And obviously, the RNC, being utterly beholden to big corporations and all the entities folded under the umbrella of the Koch network, are more than happy to play the quid pro quo game with gusto. The DNC cannot realistically disarm themselves and refuse funding from big money sources because then they would not stand a chance electorally. Sanders, if he becomes the nominee, will benefit from - will NEED - the resources that the DNC has and is gathering to be competitive.

If you wish to forward ideas or policies that address the fundamental problems in all this, then turn to how conservatives and the GOP are corrupting democracy in the US and to robust reforms in electoral financing. The DNC is the least of your worries.
0 Replies
 
 

Related Topics

Obama '08? - Discussion by sozobe
Let's get rid of the Electoral College - Discussion by Robert Gentel
McCain's VP: - Discussion by Cycloptichorn
Food Stamp Turkeys - Discussion by H2O MAN
The 2008 Democrat Convention - Discussion by Lash
McCain is blowing his election chances. - Discussion by McGentrix
Snowdon is a dummy - Discussion by cicerone imposter
TEA PARTY TO AMERICA: NOW WHAT?! - Discussion by farmerman
 
Copyright © 2024 MadLab, LLC :: Terms of Service :: Privacy Policy :: Page generated in 0.1 seconds on 05/19/2024 at 10:23:17