HomeLatest ThreadsGreatest ThreadsForums & GroupsMy SubscriptionsMy Posts
DU Home » Latest Threads » Proud Liberal Dem » Journal
Page: 1 2 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: 18,781

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

It's amazing

That it apparently was an issue worth fighting over for so long- but good for them. Wonder if their "leaders" will listen?
Posted by Proud Liberal Dem | Wed Oct 28, 2015, 04:29 PM (0 replies)

"Family time for ME!"

"Not for thee!"
Posted by Proud Liberal Dem | Fri Oct 23, 2015, 10:42 AM (2 replies)

It never ceases to amaze me

how a clearly anti-Republican thread somehow segues into an attack on Democrats- the Clintons in particular- though I guess that since this is DU and we are all supposed to loathe HRC and love Bernie, I guess I shouldn't be too surprised, unfortunately.
Posted by Proud Liberal Dem | Mon Oct 19, 2015, 09:33 PM (1 replies)

I agree

And I hope that he stays out of it- but I recognize that he has the right to run if he wants to- though I think that it will probably be a pointless/half-hearted run at best.
Posted by Proud Liberal Dem | Sun Oct 18, 2015, 01:03 PM (1 replies)

"Welcomed"? Not so much IMHO

I don't think he's so "evil" that he wanted to sit around while 3K people died (not even sure that I could say that about Cheney) and it's impossible to say if the plot could have been stopped but I don't feel like he did everything he could have to stop it and there appear to have been some missed opportunities to stop it. However, he (and Republicans in general) didn't seem to hesitate much in taking advantage of what happened for political purposes afterwards to get stuff passed/done that they might not otherwise have been able to do.
Posted by Proud Liberal Dem | Sun Oct 18, 2015, 12:15 PM (3 replies)

Did Clinton have actionable intelligence and failed to act though?

I don't really recall anybody blaming/criticizing Clinton over the first WTC attacks or even the successful 2000 USS Cole attack- but again, I don't believe that there was any actionable intelligence in either cases that Clinton's team missed AFAIK. After the first WTC attacks and the OKC bombings, he did vastly step up his anti-terrorist game and his Administration thwarted attacks (i.e. "Millennium Plot" and was really aggressive against AQ in particular. There was a VAST amount of difference in terms of how many people died in the different attacks and Clinton/Democrats didn't AFAIK blame Bush 1 for the first WTC attacks either. even though they happened relatively shortly after Clinton was inaugurated. I recall Republicans pouncing all over Clinton right after 9/11 happened even though he hadn't been POTUS for almost 8 months at that time.
Posted by Proud Liberal Dem | Sun Oct 18, 2015, 09:15 AM (0 replies)

Wow

We suspected that the committee was dragging things out for political purposes but who knew that they would be so explicit about it?
Posted by Proud Liberal Dem | Wed Oct 14, 2015, 10:20 AM (0 replies)

Aside from the "shaky" legal, moral, and political ground Jeb is walking

when talking about voting rights in light of the 2000 (s)election, is he really talking like preserving voting rights (in what is supposed to be a democracy that directly depends on them) is supposed to be a bad thing?

Posted by Proud Liberal Dem | Sat Oct 10, 2015, 10:50 AM (0 replies)

Because nearly two years after the event

Republicans wanted to go after HRC in case she decided to run for POTUS in 2016 and, in the words of McCarthy, make her "untrustable"......er......I meant, claimed to still "need answers". I think that the matter had already even been thoroughly investigated and major conspiracy theories (which shouldn't have even needed to be looked at anyway) debunked.
Posted by Proud Liberal Dem | Fri Oct 9, 2015, 10:10 AM (0 replies)

I would think that possessing what is clearly an "instrument of death"

is sufficient cause for requiring people to have to be properly trained, licensed, screened, etc. before possessing them. Thankfully, we don't live in a post-apocalyptic society where we are all at a severe level of threat of death unless armed, though you wouldn't know it from how the NRA describes the country. With the easy availability of guns and the increasing amounts of places people are being allowed to carry them (openly or otherwise), it seems more necessary than ever that people know how to actually carry/use them responsibly and safely. There are far too many examples/situations where people are clearly not being safe and responsible with them.
Posted by Proud Liberal Dem | Tue Oct 6, 2015, 11:53 AM (1 replies)
Go to Page: 1 2 Next »