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

Mc Mike

Profile Information

Member since: Wed Nov 23, 2011, 05:50 PM
Number of posts: 8,503

Journal Archives

Naomi Klein's '07 book. P. 61 on Milton Friedman.

It looks like there's 2 different issues on this post. 1) Whether to back Sec. Clinton and how much power and independence she has.
2)Exactly what's happening in Greece and other European Union partners that are teetering economically (and politically, socially).

I back Pres Obama and Sec Clinton in '12. How much foreign and econ policy control they can exert over this serious situation in Greece is debatable. My opt out scenario of re-taking Grenada wasn't a slur vs. our current Dem admin, just whistling in the dark. I know Sec. Clinton had nothing to do with Raygun pulling out of the Lebanon hot-spot and hitting Grenada, to chalk up a 'win'. I believe the harsh response to Ken here is by people that want Clinton in '16, and I'm thinking about '12. Adverse post-ers on this thread might also just want some recognition of the enormous amount of work our S.O.S. is doing, and I freely admit it.

Chicago boy shock doctrine addresses # 2. Didn't mean for it to be cryptic. Ms. Klein is a syndicated writer for The Nation, The Guardian, and Harpers; and Former Fellow at the London School of Econ. Her book 'The Shock Doctrine' covered the Milton Friedman University of Chicago neo-liberal school of economic thought, whose adherents sometimes self-appelate as the Chicago Boys (p. 95). It was interesting watching Prof. Krugman recently on R. Maddow trying to 're-claim' Friedman, but I think he was just saying current repug economic policy makes Friedman look reasonable, like how Dem politicians will sometimes 'appropriate' the positive aspects of Nixon or Reagan in order to illustrate how out of whack current GOP 'thinking' is.

Prof. Klein talks about WTO \ IMF {"business-friendly policies imposed through arm twisting...The three trademark demands -- privatization, government deregulation, and deep cuts to social spending ... extremely unpopular with citizens..." (p. 10).} That's Greece. I saw Kieros the Athens protest dog running around on this site a while back, ironically putting a 'human face' on the struggle there, which looks like Arab Spring and Occupy. As a Rainbow Coalition labor Dem, I see the Greek protestors and those other groups as allies, who are against the shock doctrine measures enacted against the 99%, by WTO (GATT, Free Trade agreements), IMF-World Bank, G-8 \ G-20, and E. U. economic policy.

Prof. Klein discussed how that alphabet soup of governmental and quasi-governmental groups actually use crises (social, political, economic), wars, and natural disasters to impose austerity on the citizens, and their corporate and financial industry 1%-er friends make a heap of money in the process. She shows where those groups precipitate crises, then use them and make profits. That's the shock doctrine. Her book gives a ton of good info, I have it dog-eared and marked up extensively.

Greece has strikes and riots, hopeless citizens turning to nazi strong men for an answer, and the possibility of another far-right military coup. The Greeks and Turks are militarized and have long-standing problems with each other. The Turks are embroiled against the Kurds, down into Iraq. The Greeks oppose the existence of Macedonia, which western financial interests carved out of the carcass of Yugoslavia. Last I heard, they oppose its recognition in the UN. So we're looking at a flash point that stretches from the Balkan WWI flash point right down into Iraq, where the whole Middle East is a tinder-box. Not an easy job for our Sec. of State.

Lastly, I call the Dailey bros the Dailey 'Boys', myself. Mayor Emmanuel has a certain boyish charm, and boyish good looks, but I was sorry to hear his opinion on progressives' mental capacities. Klein and Palast both cover the Friedman economic 'Chicago Boys' ethically shaky moves. I'd never call the Pres a 'boy', or the Sec a 'girl', but their connections to Chicago are extensive. I opposed the DLC, in every election primary for the last 20 years, even before the Koch-connection was revealed. But given the GOP penchant for constantly fielding a candidate that is more stupid, craven, and feckless than their previous election cycle offering, I anticipate them running Pauly Shore in '16. So whoever the repugs run, if Sec. Clinton is our party's nominee, I'll cast my first vote for a DLC candidate.

Thanks for the welcome. Sorry if I offended you.

Dutch brought the porn up, and I just gave my opinion. Even a measly < 100 post-er is apparently allowed to do that, on this site.

Thanks also for mentioning Alex Jones, the fat blowhard Bircher from Dallas. The Rolling Stone article on him half a year ago covered his many Bircher connections.

I never talk about the Bilderbergers, Illuminati, CFR-Trilateral Commission, Protocols of the Elders, Rothschilds, or NWO. A very experienced post-er like you should be able to argue without putting words in their 'opponent's' mouth. My go-to bad guys are the masons, nazis, and Birchers (LaRouche, Beck, Paul, Jones). I also like to bash Opus Dei and P-2, because I'm an anti-nazi Catholic.

I notice how you and D believe I'm involved in a conspiracy with red and sea, while simultaneously painting me as a wacky conspiracy-theorist. My word to you, that I'm not a former radical fem post-er who has been TSed and reincarnated, is not going to disabuse you of that notion. If you could point to a post where I ever weighed in on 'radical' Women's issues, you'd have at least one substantiating fact to back your assertion. In reality, I just back red and sea on the simple sociological issue that the OP poll brought up, and have never clapped eyes on them or their posts in DU before.

Simply put, I've said I don't believe that I have a right to tell a woman what word she uses to self-appelate. I don't believe that it's any of my business what two consenting adults do with their sexuality. I don't believe that I have the right to tell anyone what to do regarding porn consumption, I just know why I endorse an economic boycott of it. You can enjoy yourself, however you want, alone or with your significant other, and it's not my business. D brought up prostitution and porn, in one of his many (many, many) postings that tend to divert from the simple idea Red polled DU women on.

Since you're an OPE fan, I'd like to mention that the Lavender Mafia owns the porn distribution sites in the Pittsburgh area, kind of like how the Pagan bikers and the Farrakhan-ites own illegal drug distribution around here. I don't know what to make of it, in terms of conclusions to be drawn from the fact. But thought I'd mention it, in case it would be helpful to you, either to have further evidence to pigeon-hole me as a conspiracy theorist, or just for purely informational purposes.

Dang, Dutch.

You have thousands of posts, so you must be a good Dem. You surely must be seeing the current unprecedented level of repug attacks vs. women.

The O.P. is talking about one fundamental reinforcing mechanism used by bad people, to keep doing bad things. It's about colonization of minds, (belittlement, infantilization, objectification, call it what you will), achieved through the language a person uses when addressing another person. The post doesn't even make a statement, it just asks DU women what they think. Everyone that uses that language isn't bad, but it is aiding the people who are thinking and doing bad. And using it because it is 'traditional', or 'no big deal', is lazy thinking at best.

Maybe Dworkin hurt you. But you're capable of making your own O.P. that addresses the excesses that you feel Feminists are guilty of perpetrating, instead of making umpteen postings on this one. Bitter infighting among Progressive Democratic allies serves no one.

VOChoice.org could use your energy (brains, fighting spirit), if you're willing to help women and Dems against the real bad guys, who are the repugs and not the Feminists. It's a very positive channel, check their org out.

Interesting anti-teacher media move in Pittsburgh, yesterday.

The Pgh. Post - Gazette ran with a story that the school board is asking AFT Local 400 to agree to furloughs not based on seniority, a 'kill the union' resolution.

The story ran the morning that the Pgh. Federation of Teachers had their ballots delivered by mail to all rank-and-file members, for the upcoming election of all union officials. The anti-incumbent candidate (son of 'Studio Wrestling' champ Bruno Sammartino) has been a gadfly to all three union presidents and their officers, but he can't get it together enough to fill a 30 member slate of reps. to the PA state AFT. A yutz. (I'm I. B. of Electrical Workers Local 5, but my wife's a Local 400 rank-and-filer, so I've watched their union politics for decades.)

The 2nd biggest school district in PA is of course being hammered by (repug) Gov 'Close your Eyes' Corbett's 1 billion in state ed budget cuts, and the incumbent leadership is fighting a desperate rear-guard action against the non-elected Superintendent, to save jobs. They are doing this while also fighting a union election battle.

The timing of this newspaper article's publication is clearly designed to promote an anti-incumbency 'heat of the moment' vote by the rank-and-file, in protest of the direction in which EVERYTHING - schools, the teaching profession, union representation - is going.

Watch the wun percent at work.

Tactically speaking, I advocate that the AFT, NEA, and AFSCME throw a nationwide wildcat one day strike, in solidarity with the May Day General strike. Teachers and staff can see the kids at school May 1st, just not IN school. It would definitely be a positive educational experience for 99% of public school kids, and their families. (Just my opinion, but maybe I'm a bigger yutz than Sammartino.)

Edit to add: Sammartino is Bruno's nephew, I heard yesterday. He lost on May 16, but the full incumbent slate didn't win.

I am a progressive Labor Democratic Ally of

OWS Pittsburgh 99%, Spring 99% from MoveOn and One Pittsburgh, and Labor Dems 'Get Out the Vote' efforts for candidates who back the 99%.

An alliance is not a co-optation. People in any of these groups can pick and choose to act or stand aside, in any and every action proposed by an ally. I never received a cent from the Dems for helping them out, I get requests for money from them. If OWS 99 proposes an action against a Democratic politician, like today's rally against District Attorney Zappala, for refusing to press charges against unionized Labor cops who mauled an innocent high school student, I can take off my Democrat and Labor hats, and put on my Occupy 99% hat, and attend. (1 pm in Mellon Park, across from Bakery Square.)

A lot of members of Occupy, Spring, and Rainbow Coalition Dems are members of more than one of these three groups. They can likewise switch hats when choosing to support an action for 99% of Americans, and no co-optation exists.

OWS 99 has aided Labor Democrats in Pgh., and Labor groups have aided OWS 99. Spring 99 is aiding OWS 99 here, and OWS 99 is aiding Spring 99. Labor groups are part of Spring 99's alliance, and Spring 99ers are aiding Labor. OWS and Spring aren't scheduling conflicting events.

Spring 99% brings a lot of good activist groups into an alliance, though they could use the addition of Women's Rights groups and LGBT groups.

Minus One

I can't find the un rec button anymore, so I did what I could.

Nothing against you, x, I think the info comes from repug trolls who fear that Occupy, Spring 99, and rainbow Coalition Dems all have so much in common that they are naturally allied.

Sorry HPD, can't give you a link.

Your post # 50 is the # 4 result in hits on Yahoo for jrkcia (so I'm chasing our tail on-line on this issue), and Yahoo result # 3 is an amusing discussion from a dot com (called 'whose media' drums in the global village). Basically a fight between several high level 'panthers' with CIA ties -- Malik Shabaaz, Katherine Cleaver, Elaine Brown, Geronimo Pratt. Here's why I say that:

Post 31 on this site has a good link from the SPLC about Malik Shabazz, the fake new black panther. If you combine Dallas, Farrakhan' NOI, a designation as a hate group, and the repug effort to make these new paper panthers into a credible underground conspiracy (the point of the original post here), if you combine them all into one neat package like Shabaaz's outfit represents, you're looking at 'the government' and intelligence agencies, as well as repug campaign media propaganda efforts. 'The government' isn't just the Obama Admin, it's also 'old hands' who are holding power over the course of many presidential administrations.

The Cleavers' connections with the CIA are undoubtable.

Pratt took over the LA Panthers when Ms. Huggins' husband was killed by Karenga's United Slaves outfit. (Seale discussed Karenga's Los Angeles gas station venture as being backed by the Rockefellers in 'Sieze The Time'. CIA.) Newton didn't trust Pratt, and Pratt is connected to Ward Churchill(CIA) through 'Studies on the Left' magazine. Churchill is a 'professor' like Karenga (who used to be Ron Everett, before all his name changes.) 'Pratt and LA' is important because the Wiki info on Jay Richard Kennedy and Brown put them in the music business, and LA, at that time.

Wiki's Elaine Brown info has her moving to LA around '61, to be a pro songwriter, but she winds up working in a wise guy strip bar, and meets the CIA's Kennedy. It also indicates her cutting records for the Panthers in '68 and '73, but whether she recorded in LA or Motown isn't indicated.

Wiki of Motown shows they had 110 top 10 records from '61 to '71. They started moving to LA in '69, (after Bunchy Carter and John Huggins were assassinated and Pratt took over the LA Panthers) and Motown completed the move by '72.

I tried to get an on-line link for you on Kennedy and Motown, that avoids citing wiki and Brown's autobiography, since my caveat on 'A Taste of Power' started the whole original conversation, and I don't really like citing wiki. But I couldn't. I don't own the book, but read it from the library in '93. I dug up a hard-copy Essence Magazine article from Feb. of '93, that promotes her book (starts on p. 58), but she spends too much time bashing Newton in it, to mention her musical career and CIA friend Kennedy. I have an absract from New York Times Magazine for 1-31-93, page 20, by author Rosemary L. Bray, but no way to get the Times site to cough it up. It interviews Brown about her book, her early life in Hollywood, and her relationship with Jay Kennedy. Ms. Bray seems to be good, unlike Brown, and she used to edit the NY Times Magazine, but I can't get it on-line for you.

So to bite the bullet, all I can say it that Brown's 'Taste' discusses Kennedy more thoroughly than I can find available in internet sources. He went to Motown, or Motown came to him in LA. He was involved in representing acts, and on the business end of Motown, according to Brown. She wasn't blowing the whistle on him, she was discussing his accomplishments. That's what I remember about her discussion of Kennedy in her book, but my memory doesn't prove anything to you. When Motown got broke is a matter of individual listeners' taste. I think the complete move to LA killed it, but some good music lingered in Detroit and LA, even after that. Then those sparks faded too.

So to cut to the chase, I can't prove a connection on-line between the CIA's Kennedy and Motown, and must recommend Elaine Brown's book for further reference(!) Lifes a bitch, sometimes, I guess. I won't be re-reading it myself, because I disliked and distrusted Brown enough the first time around. I'm sorry that I couldn't get something credible for you as a link on-line, and hopefully I didn't waste your time with the long response.

True. I did read her book when it was released, but

if you watched the coverage she got during her book release, both televised and print, you could see that she was pushing government sponsored lies about the Panthers. I saw her being interviewed at that time on a television show, along with Dave Hilliard. He seems to be great, (and he wasn't with her, just sharing the same interview) but she promoted the gov's fake propaganda charges of misogyny, organized crime thuggery, etc., against the Panthers. This was decades after Sieze the Time refuted those charges, and she just recycled them. I'd rather hear from Ericka Huggins or Angela Davis, than hear any further from Brown.

She didn't mortally wound the panthers, but she helped Cointelpro nail the lid on the coffin, then decades later, danced on the grave for money.

Catholic bishops denied Kerry communion in '04, because he was pro-choice.

In '08, my catholic bishop (Zubik in Pittsburgh) made the public statement that there were many important political issues in the election, but the only 'non-negotiable' issue was the candidate's stance on pro-choice vs 'pro-life'. Not the death penalty, not starving children, not war, just pro-choice. (Therefore, voting for a pro-choice Dem is a sin. Our Catholic doctrine requires us to confess sins. You're supposed to not commit that sin again after absolution.) After we rank-and-file catholics put Zubik on ignore and whomped his pig repug buddies' asses in the election, he issued the statement that 'now that the election is over, he hopes that Prez Elect Obama will pay attention to the concerns of the Catholic Church.'

This year, Zubik pushed the repug's b.s. issue of Obama's 'attack' on religious freedom and the church, both in the Pittsburgh Catholic weekly newspaper, and by sending flunkies to state his views from the pulpit, during the sermon. The National Catholic Reporter weighed in on the issue:

excerpt from the link:

"Asked what he might say to a Catholic woman who had attempted to follow the church's official teaching on contraception but had found it painful or difficult to do so because of health or other reasons, the bishop would only say that he thinks 'that really is an issue that's between a confessor and a penitent.'"

I'm a practicing Catholic, and it seems like you are too. I'm with you on the 98% statistic. To me, it looks like the thing to do is ignore the hierarchy when they say things that rise to the Zubik level of stupidity. I walked out when Zubik's muscle bound Deacon delivered his repug campaign propaganda during the sermon, and I never give the church any money. But I still go to church, because I'm not going to let the bad guys spoil my good time.

Thanks Sol. You're 100% right.

It may have started out as a garden-variety racist murder, but the right wing bad guys are trying to amplify it into riots, in order to defeat our first black president.
Go to Page: « Prev 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 Next »