HomeLatest ThreadsGreatest ThreadsForums & GroupsMy SubscriptionsMy Posts
DU Home » Latest Threads » 99th_Monkey » Journal
Page: 1 2 3 Next »


Profile Information

Gender: Male
Current location: Potlandia
Member since: Fri Sep 28, 2007, 03:39 PM
Number of posts: 19,326

Journal Archives

Woot! I hope this means what I think it means ... "Billions for Bernie"

I've been trying for 35 minutes now to donate to Bernie before the deadline, but all I
get is this ...

I hope that means the site is so swamped that it raises "Billions for Bernie"

CNN: "We don't have any time anymore" for US Constitution & Bill of Rights

Wolf has a panel of handpicked "nat'l security analysts" (read ex-CIA/Military war-heads)
talking about how 'we don't have time anymore" to "wait around" when monitoring
"potential terrorists" .. to "see if they are going to attack" ... Wolf nods approvingly..

Essentially saying that -- instead of surveilling and monitoring suspected terrorists, we need
to start rounding them up and/or lock them up .. very creepy. On what grounds again?

The rationale dominating the conversation was that ISIS now has a bunch of 'lone wolves"
willing to carry out attacks on the public, and the lead-time that's detectable from surveillance
is getting shorter and shorter, due to social media .. blah blah..

It's like ISIS is being branded as "The New 911" all over again.

Does anyone have contact info for Sanders' 2016 campaigns

at the state level.

I live in a west coast late-Primary state, but fully expect Bernie to win here,
and look forward to helping that happen.

Sanders Sees Clinton Camp Attacks as Sign that 'Something Must Be Working'

Sanders Sees Clinton Camp Attacks as Sign that 'Something Must Be Working'
'Bernie is too liberal to gather enough votes in this country to become president,' says Sen. Claire McCaskill of Missouri
June 26, 2015 * Common Dreams * by Deirdre Fulton, staff writer

In a move viewed as further evidence of Sen. Bernie Sanders' continued momentum in the polls and among potential voters in the 2016 presidential election, some Hillary Clinton supporters have gone on the offense against the self-described democratic socialist.

Sen. Claire McCaskill (D-Mo.), a Clinton backer, launched what The Hill described as "the sharpest attack yet" on Sanders in a television appearance on Thursday. "Bernie is too liberal to gather enough votes in this country to become president," she told MSNBC's "Morning Joe."

McCaskill assailed Sanders for having "an extreme message" and being "unrealistic," while complaining that the media were "not giving the same scrutiny to Bernie Sanders that they are giving to certainly Hillary Clinton and the other candidates."


Sanders subsequently struck back in an interview with Bloomberg Politics' Mark Halperin and John Heilemann, calling into question McCaskill's progressive bona fides. "Do I believe, in opposition to Senator McCaskill, that we need trade policies that are fair to the American worker, and not just benefit CEOs and large corporations?" Sanders said. "I plead guilty."


Desperate Bernie Sanders detractors have reached a new low


Now they are stooping to posting ugly outright lies with no sources no link, just vitriol
...apparently hoping something will stick, and that DU will spread the lie.

I totally thought DU was better than this.

Good News for Bernie Sanders? Poll Shows 47% of Americans Would Vote for a Socialist


Good News for Bernie Sanders? Poll Shows 47% of Americans Would Vote for a Socialist
A sizeable chunk of Americans say they’d consider voting to send a socialist to the Oval Office.
BY MARC DAALDER * JUNE 24, 2015 * In These Times

A new Gallup poll shows that 47 percent of Americans would consider voting for a socialist candidate. Gallup has been polling Americans on their voting preferences for candidates of different backgrounds since 1937, but this year was the first time they inquired about socialism.

When broken down on party lines, a socialist candidate would earn the consideration of 59 percent of Democrats, 49 percent of Independents, and only 26 percent of Republicans. Overall, socialism charted the lowest of all the backgrounds referenced in the poll. Atheist and Muslim candidates ranked second- and third-lowest among the American populace, at 58 and 60 percent respectively.

This poll comes less than two months after Bernie Sanders announced his candidacy, becoming the first self-described socialist (with at least a decent chance of winning) to do so in more than a decade.

Advocates for Sanders argue that the Gallup poll is misleading for a number of reasons. While Americans may disapprove of a socialist candidate, they strongly support policies that Sanders stands for. Fifty-two percent support a redistribution of wealth through heavily taxing the rich, for example—the highest number that Gallup has seen since first asking that question in 1940. And 63 percent of Americans believe that the current distribution of wealth in the US is unfair.


Senate GOP thanks Obama for shoving TPP down Dems/Labor/workers throats

by attacking Obamacare and trashing Obama's Iran nuclear treaty, now on c-span2.

I hope Obama is enjoying his "victory"

So now we finally know where Hillary "Listen-to-Pelosi" Clinton stands on TPP

TPP biggest Winners & Losers

Here Are The Trade Fight's Biggest Winners And Losers
06/23/2015 * by Zach Carter * HuffPo

WASHINGTON -- The bruising battle over President Barack Obama's trade agenda was very likely decided on Tuesday as the Senate advanced a fast-track bill that would ease the passage of controversial trade pacts with Pacific Rim nations and the European Union. While those pending deals will still eventually have to clear tough votes in the House, Obama is now closer than ever to securing his trade platform. Here are the biggest winners and losers from the action. Details at Link.


1. Barack Obama:
2. Mitch McConnell:
3. PhRMA:
4. Nike:
5. Sherrod Brown:


1. Barack Obama:
2. Labor unions & Workers
3. Patty Murray:
4. Senate Democrats:
5. Sick Poor People:

Link: http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2015/06/23/trade-winners-losers_n_7649378.html

Is DU immune from these nefarious influences?

Judging from some posts, I think not. But I may just be paranoid

Spy Agency's Secret Plans to Foster Online "Conformity" and "Obedience" Exposed
Internal memo from secretive British spy unit exposes how GCHQ and NSA used human psychological research to create sophisticated online propaganda tools
byJon Queally, staff writer * Monday, June 22, 2015 * by Common Dreams

With never-before-seen documents accompanied by new reporting on Monday, The Intercept's Glenn Greenwald and Andrew Fishman are offering a more in-depth look than ever into how a secretive unit of the UK's GCHQ surveillance agency used a host of psychological methods and online subterfuge in order to manipulate the behavior of individuals and groups through the internet and other digital forms of communication.

According to the reporting, the latest documents, which were leaked to journalists by NSA whistleblower Edward Snowden,

demonstrate how the Joint Threat Research Intelligence Group (JTRIG), a unit of the signals intelligence agency Government Communications Headquarters (GCHQ), is involved in efforts against political groups it considers “extremist,” Islamist activity in schools, the drug trade, online fraud, and financial scams.

Though its existence was secret until last year, JTRIG quickly developed a distinctive profile in the public understanding, after documents from NSA whistleblower Edward Snowden revealed that the unit had engaged in “dirty tricks” like deploying sexual “honey traps” designed to discredit targets, launching denial-of-service attacks to shut down internet chat rooms, pushing veiled propaganda onto social networks, and generally warping discourse online.

Among the most troubling revelations is a 42-page internal JTRIG memo that describes in detail how the elite unit developed, maintained, and apparently sought to expand its "scientific and psychological research into how human thinking and behavior can be influenced" in order to increase its ability to "manipulate public opinion" via online tools like email, social media, video, discussion forums, and other platforms.

Go to Page: 1 2 3 Next »