HomeLatest ThreadsGreatest ThreadsForums & GroupsMy SubscriptionsMy Posts
DU Home » Latest Threads » intheflow » Journal
Page: « Prev 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 Next »


Profile Information

Gender: Do not display
Hometown: Springfield
Home country: Planet Earth
Member since: Mon Aug 9, 2004, 01:39 PM
Number of posts: 25,358

Journal Archives

We listen. It's how we are able to use her own words against her.

1990: "As a shareholder and director of our company, Im always proud of Wal-Mart and what we do and the way we do it better than anybody else.

1994: "If, for whatever reason, the Congress doesn't pass health care reform, I believe, and I may be to totally off base on this, but I believe that by the year 2000 we will have a single payer system. I don't even think it's a close call politically. I think the momentum for a single payer system will sweep the country... It will be such a huge popular issue... that even if it's not successful the first time, it will eventually be."

1996: "They are often the kinds of kids that are called 'super-predators.' No conscience, no empathy, we can talk about why they ended up that way, but first we have to bring them to heel."

2008: "You should be willing to debate any time, anywhere."

2013: "I am determined to leave the State Department and our country safer, stronger, and more secure."

2015: "I'll look into it."

Honestly, I've been listening to Clinton BS for over a quarter century. Really not impressed with what I've heard. Except for those 1994 and 2008 quotes. But we all know how she's changed her stance on them now.

You have to credit him for evolving his nuclear action.

His position on nuclear changed from this action in 1996 to urging Obama "to declare a nuclear moratorium" in 2011. It looks to me like the more information he had on the subject, the more he was able to change his mind to work for a safer, nuclear-free world for everyone.

I congratulate him for opening his mind to enlightenment. That's the kind of president I want.

I miss the unrec button, too.

But if we're keeping the jury system, I like your suggestions that the juries not be anonymous. I'd also like to make it a requirement that jurors comment on their decisions. Under the moderator system, there was discussion among the mods. People had to give reasons, within the mod group, why they believed strongly one way or another that a post should be hidden. I sit on a lot of juries, and while some alerts are spurious, I try to comment on each alert. I think the alerter deserves to know why I agree or disagree with their alert. Really, it's just common courtesy. And it would add to transparency.

The problem with this analysis is it assumes independent voters in Mass are conservative.

This is wrong. Some of the most liberal places in Massachusetts are in the Western part of the state: the five college towns of Northampton, Amherst, and South Hadley all went to Bernie, for instance. The artist communities in the Berkshires mostly went Bernie. The places that didn't go Bernie? The richest parts of the state. So don't tell me we're all Republicans west of Weston. The Republicans who make this part of the state conservative didn't vote in the Democratic primary. The poor artists and students and teachers and professors did. And we voted for Bernie.

Just need to thank this group for being a light of sanity and hope in a sea of DNC despair.

The indoctrinated DNC on here and elsewhere online are sucking the life out of me. Trying to hold Clinton accountable for anything she's done or supported in the last 35 years equals insulting a demigod to them, they go into immediate attack mode. I've been censored. I've been verbally abused. My Democratic loyalties are called into question. I've been called rude for posting civil dissent. It's walk in lockstep with them or STFU.


Deep breathe.

I'm glad you folks are here. You are my tribe.

White ally here asking for an opinion on the BLM/Sanders protests.

Really, asking for opinions, insights, reflections, or whatever you have to say on the matter. You can't see color on DU unless someone self-identifies, but I'd guess the majority of people in this forum are black Americans. Since I can't see a poster's color, I want to try to hear what some DUers of color think about the protest in Seattle more clearly than sifting through the majority of white voices on DU. I understand your opinions/thoughts/insights are your own, you don't speak for your whole race any more than I speak for mine. But here are my questions; answer what you want, any or all of them.

  • Why do you think protesters targeting Sanders and not Clinton or any Republican?

  • Is there a central organizing force behind the BLM movement, or are chapters (for lack of a better word) being formed locally and acting independently under the rubric of BLM because it's a nationally recognized phrase/movement? I ask this because I've read more than once that the "real" BLM organizers don't support protesting Sanders, but I can't find any posts from any group claiming to be BLM actually saying this.

  • If these are local movements, are they spontaneous, or are they off-shoots of local racial justice organizations? I think what I'm trying to figure out is, are they being lead by seasoned/trained community organizers or by people/young people new to the struggle? I ask this because I've worked as a community organizer and given Sanders' history of working for fair housing and socialist views, it seems like he should be the frontrunner for people seeking more equity, at least economically - which is such a huge component of the social construction of racism in the US.

  • In your opinion, are these protests primarily unfocused and born out of anger, or do you think the protesters believe one candidate should be held accountable for solving 500 years of socially constructed racism? My apologies for the word "unfocused" in my question, because I know the anger is real, but as one who studies histories, I understand there are movements born out of reactionary anger from societal repression (the Stonewall riots, and of course, the initial BLM organizing around Trayvon Martin's killing) and those born out of intentional planning (Nat Turner, NAACP, and the Black Panthers). So I guess what I'm asking is, do you think there's a targeted strategy behind the protests?

I ask these questions in all sincerity, as a 50-something white woman who has worked in black communities and is well-versed in US racial history, but who is still really freakin' white and privileged day-to-day. The crux is, I'm trying to wrap my head around the historical and contemporary context of what's happening but am probably too deeply mired in my own racist white baggage to have a clue about what's really happening in black communities.

My intention is to listen, because I know that black voices matter as much as black lives, so unless asked a direct question, I will limit my participation in the rest of this thread.

What are you thoughts on all of this, in light of a second Sanders protest today?


Full disclosure: I am a Sanders supporter, but I listened to him in Denver just a few days after Charlestown and walked away feeling cold because I so desperately wanted him to talk about racism, and particularly, the massacre. I think he's the best candidate because he's the only candidate who seems to have a clue what the real economy is like for millions of Americans, but it was a sore disappointment not to hear him say anything at all about Charlestown. He did talk a bit about police profiling and killing young black men, which was at least some acknowledgement of racial reality. But it didn't go deep enough by a long shot.

berniesoblack is not a Hillary operative campaign.

As far as I can see, it was started as a tongue-in-cheek tweet from the black community. I'm an ardent Bernie supporter and I thought a lot of the tweets were really funny. Seriously, you need to stop taking yourself so seriously. Progressives without a sense of humor will not be able to endure the arduous and depressing work on race and class that needs to be done in this country.

Visitors to the garden.

I'm housesitting this week and have been enjoying sitting in the garden in the evenings after work. Brought my long lens with me exactly in the hopes of capturing some of the critters who don't like humans to get too close. These are my three favorite shots.

Bumblebee on a snapdragon

Common whitetail dragonfly

Swallowtail butterfly - In the excitement of the moment of seeing this butterfly land within the reach of my lens, I forgot to check the aperture before I snapped the shot. It was pretty blown out but through the magic of photoshop, I was able to redeem it. I think it looks rather ethereal.

My photo and video from the Bernie Sanders event in Denver tonight.

I got there about two hours early to get a good seat. Ended up eight rows back, center-left.

I got one short video clip of his speech before my camera battery died. So here's Bernie, talking about the decline of the middle class wages despite increased worker productivity.

So freaking inspiring to hear a political candidate talk about real issues affecting real people! He ranged from gender wage equity, to reinstating Glass-Steagal, to explaining the TPP (in easy-to-understand language), to the climate denial all around us - going so far in praising Pope's encyclical on climate as to refer to Francis as "a great man of God." Really a remarkable event.

That's Dorothy Pitman Hughes with Steinem, not Angela Davis.

Lots of people make that mistake, including the NY Post editorial screen capture you included in your OP.


Here's the original photo with proper attribution from the Smith College archives: http://www.smith.edu/libraries/libs/ssc/agents/steinemhughes.html

Here's a little write-up on the recreated photo in 2014:

Edited to add: "We are women. We are still fighting after all these years." But black women are still fighting to just be recognized, apparently.
Go to Page: « Prev 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 Next »