HomeLatest ThreadsGreatest ThreadsForums & GroupsMy SubscriptionsMy Posts
DU Home » Latest Threads » Proud Liberal Dem » Journal
Page: 1 2 3 4 5 Next »

Proud Liberal Dem

Profile Information

Name: Mara
Gender: Female
Hometown: Indianapolis, Indiana
Home country: USA
Current location: Indianapolis, Indiana
Member since: Sat Feb 28, 2004, 12:13 AM
Number of posts: 20,562

About Me

Transgender (MTF) Social Worker/Case Manager working for State of Indiana. Huge Sci-Fi/Anime Geek and music lover. Hopeless \"political junkie\" and aspiring writer.

Journal Archives

Glad somebody is through with grovelling to Issa over his phony scandals

I bet the people over at the Pentagon are none too happy with him over BENGHAZI! as well.
Posted by Proud Liberal Dem | Thu Mar 27, 2014, 03:26 PM (0 replies)

If memory serves

The UN Resolution that put the inspectors back in Iraq (1441?) stated something about "serious consequences" if it did not comply. Iraq, of course, DID comply with the UN and allowed the inspectors back in and they found no evidence of new/recent WMD activity. My understanding was that Bush/Cheney wanted to go back to the UN for a second resolution explicitly authorizing war but, as I recall, nixed the idea because they believed that they would not win it (and why would they since Iraq was actually in compliance per the UN weapons inspectors?) and decided to go into Iraq anyway as Bush/Cheney believed they had the authority. So, no, the UN did not explicitly authorize war and even if you take the "serious consequences" line in the initial resolution to be defined as war, Iraq was found by the UN to be in compliance with the resolution, so any kind of military action or other "serious consequences" should not have been imposed. Like with the IWR in Congress, it's all real "fuzzy" legally speaking, as to what was "approved". Of course, "fuzzy" was just the way the Bush (mis-)administration liked things, so..............
Posted by Proud Liberal Dem | Thu Mar 27, 2014, 03:07 PM (0 replies)

This was definitely a misstep

Don't know that it will necessarily destroy our GOTV efforts in November but he really didn't need to go there IMHO. Of course, we already know that Bush, Cheney, et al will not suffer any legal consequences over Iraq but PBO doesn't need to be the one justifying/apologising for it IMHO
Posted by Proud Liberal Dem | Thu Mar 27, 2014, 09:18 AM (1 replies)

No need for him to defend the indefensible here

Just to respond to criticism over our outrage over Crimea. While it may be technically true that Bush gave his (mis)-adventure in Iraq a fig leaf of "legitimacy", it still shouldn't require President Obama to rationalise it in order to condemn Russia's annexation of Crimea. Frankly, his hands are clean. He was neither in charge when the Iraq invasion was launched nor was he a supporter. He just should have stayed silent on this IMHO
Posted by Proud Liberal Dem | Thu Mar 27, 2014, 06:31 AM (1 replies)

I know right?!

Republicans would have been calling them "sore losers" and ridiculed them whenever they came on. How people still get away with the "liberal media" lie day after day blows my mind. It seems like when Republicans are in charge, the media gets them on ad nauseum. When Republicans are in charge, the media puts them on as nauseum as well.
Posted by Proud Liberal Dem | Sun Mar 23, 2014, 06:35 PM (0 replies)

I am blessed with very few Republicans in my life

strangely though a lot of my female relatives (mom, stepmom, sister-in-law) are Republican though we rarely talk politics and none of them seem to be of the really rabid and "in-your-face" variety, which makes things a bit easier.
I've tried to work on my mom a little bit and the past two elections I thought I might finally convince her to vote Democratic because she seems disenchanted with the Republicans but, in the end, she couldn't bring herself to do it.
As for my sister-in-law, sometimes she'll spout off about Hillary or something and I'll sort of toy around with her and talk like a "Colbert-conservative". I don't know if I fool her or not but it's sort of fun to speak like I imagine Republicans speak to one another. :
My stepmom doesn't really talk politics. None of them are what I would refer to as cruel and/or malicious people, just misinformed/ignorant. I would not seriously consider cutting any of them off unless they started attacking my beliefs or supporting something really odious. I used to have a teabagger friend on my FB until I finally unfriended him after he started attacking me after sparring back and forth over guns for awhile. Life is too short for a lot of unnecessary drama IMHO.
Posted by Proud Liberal Dem | Fri Mar 21, 2014, 07:34 AM (0 replies)

It seems like guns are more often than not used for anything BUT killing "bad guys"

Come to think of it, why DON'T we hear more stories about people actually using them to blow away bad guys? I mean, you'd think that the NRA would be hyping them more often. Not that I think that it NEVER happens but it always strikes me as being more of a fantasy than a reality most of the time.
Posted by Proud Liberal Dem | Thu Mar 20, 2014, 05:24 PM (0 replies)

Exactly

Check out 6 years of Bush/Cheney vs. 6 years of Obama/Biden. Bush had 6 years (give or take a few months) of a GOP-controlled Congress that was extremely loyal to him. Obama had 2 years of a Democratic-controlled Congress consisting of Blue Dogs- some of whom were almost as adversarial towards him as some of the Republicans- to say nothing of the unprecedented GOP obstructionism in the Senate where a majority of votes required is now 60 instead of 51. He got some stuff done during that time period and one would hope/think that he would've gotten more stuff done had Democrats continued to retain control of Congress but, of course, party control has been split between the House and Senate since then and the most he's been able to accomplish, really, is "damage control".
Posted by Proud Liberal Dem | Thu Mar 20, 2014, 12:14 PM (0 replies)

Sounds sort of what Rick Santorum was saying on the campaign trail in 2012

and while I concede that there may be some degree of truth there, such talk smacks (at least to me) of right-wing anti-elitism ("we don't need any more eggheads" or could even be looked at as elitism ("I/we know what's best for you". IMHO we should be encouraging students to decide for themselves what their goals and dreams are and assist them in moving in that direction (or at the very least not standing in their way of trying). I don't think it's right to deny or discourage people from trying something they want to do. If they ultimately don't succeed, at least they will have the reassurance and knowledge that they were ALLOWED to try. I think that it's sort of arrogant and presumptuous IMHO to render a judgement on whether somebody is "college material" or not and/or try to limit people's choices based on our beliefs (however educated they may be).
Posted by Proud Liberal Dem | Thu Mar 20, 2014, 10:02 AM (1 replies)

and among people living in states where navigators are being harassed

Hell, anybody trying to educate people about the law or trying to promote it have been bullied and/or harassed.
Posted by Proud Liberal Dem | Tue Mar 18, 2014, 02:09 PM (1 replies)
Go to Page: 1 2 3 4 5 Next »