Forum Replies Created
-
AuthorPosts
-
December 2, 2016 at 10:57 am in reply to: Jill Stein raising money for vote recount in swing states #59998
wvParticipantRecount update on Democracy now:https://www.democracynow.org/2016/11/30/jill_stein_recounts_are_necessary_because?utm_source=Democracy+Now%21&utm_campaign=37b0615662-Daily_Digest&utm_medium=email&utm_term=0_fa2346a853-37b0615662-190239997
Former presidential candidate Dr. Jill Stein is continuing her efforts to force recounts in three states: Wisconsin, Pennsylvania and Michigan. But on Tuesday the effort faced a setback as a Wisconsin judge refused to order a statewide hand recount. Instead, the judge ruled that each of the state’s 72 county clerks can decide on their own how to carry out the recount. Donald Trump beat Hillary Clinton in Wisconsin by less than 30,000 votes out of 2.8 million cast. The result was even closer in Michigan, where Trump won by just 12,000 votes. Stein is expected to file paperwork in Michigan by today’s deadline to request a recount there. More than 130,000 people have donated more than $6.5 million Stein’s efforts—that’s nearly double how much Stein raised during her presidential effort. We speak to Jill Stein.
TRANSCRIPT
This is a rush transcript. Copy may not be in its final form.AMY GOODMAN: Former presidential candidate Dr. Jill Stein is continuing her efforts to force recounts in three states: Wisconsin, Pennsylvania and Michigan. But on Tuesday the effort faced a setback as a Wisconsin judge refused to order a statewide hand recount. Instead, the judge ruled that each of the state’s 72 county clerks can decide on their own how to carry out the recount. Donald Trump beat Hillary Clinton in Wisconsin by less than 30,000 votes out of 2.8 million cast. The result was even closer in Michigan, where Trump won by just 12,000 votes. Dr. Stein is expected to file paperwork in Michigan by today’s deadline, requesting a recount there. More than 130,000 people have donated more than $6.5 million to Stein’s efforts. That’s nearly double how much Stein raised during her presidential effort.
Trump has dismissed the recount efforts. In a statement, he said, “This is a scam by the Green Party for an election that has already been conceded, and the results of this election should be respected instead of being challenged and abused, which is exactly what Jill Stein is doing,” he said. However, in another tweet, Trump did claim that millions of people illegally voted in the November 8th election. In a tweet sent out on Sunday, Trump wrote, “In addition to winning the Electoral College in a landslide, I won the popular vote if you deduct the millions of people who voted illegally,” unquote. He offered no evidence to back up his claim. While Donald Trump did win the Electoral College, Democratic nominee Hillary Clinton’s lead in the popular vote has now reached well over 2 million and is expected to grow to two-and-a-half million.
To talk more about the recount efforts, we’re joined by former Green Party presidential candidate Jill Stein. She’s joining us from Boston.
Welcome back to Democracy Now!, Jill. Talk about your recount efforts, why you’ve decided to go this route.
DR. JILL STEIN: Right. Thank you, and good to be with you this morning, Amy. You know, coming out of this very divisive and bitter and painful election, you know, confidence of Americans in our voting system, in our election system, our political system—really, across the board, confidence in American institutions is really at rock-bottom low. According to a New York Times poll, 80 percent of Americans—more than 80 percent—said they were disgusted by the election. It’s really important that we be able to improve our election system and our political system as a base, a point of departure, for improving all the other things that are melting down around us—our healthcare system, our jobs, our climate, the endless wars that are making us less secure, and so on. We need to start by verifying our votes and ensuring that this is a democracy that we can work with.
Donald Trump himself said that it was a rigged election, in ways—in ways that he probably didn’t understand. But there was enormous resonance with what he said about it being a rigged election. When Bernie Sanders talked about it being a rigged economy, there was enormous resonance with that. This isn’t something we can just walk away and sweep under the rug. And remember, in this election, most people were voting against the candidate that they liked the least or that they were most afraid of, rather than for their values or for their vision of a better future.
So, I think there’s widespread soul searching and discontent about this election we’ve come out of. And I think it’s a really positive step that people have decided this is where we’re going to start, by ensuring that we can have confidence in the vote count. This is not about attempting to help one candidate or hurt another candidate. This is about helping voters restore confidence that we are properly and securely recording the votes and counting them. And we know that these voting machines are subject to machine error, human error, hacking, tampering, you name it. These machines, when they’re looked into, produce all kinds of problems. And you can’t know unless you look.
AMY GOODMAN: Can you respond to the Wisconsin judge, and what this means, handing it off to the local voting precincts?
DR. JILL STEIN: What the judge said was that hand-counted would be the gold standard and that that was the best way to restore confidence in the vote. But he, I’m told—this is secondhand—what I understand is that he acknowledged that the Wisconsin law didn’t enable him to order that. So he gave it, shall we say, moral authority to do the hand counts, but felt he could not actually order the hand counts. So it will be up to the county clerks and the county election departments, and we’ll be working with them and encouraging them to do the right thing. Now, the good news is, in the state of Michigan, where we’re formally filing today, we’ve already had an informal heads-up that they expect to go forward with a statewide hand count.
AMY GOODMAN: And are you going to be moving forward on Michigan today?
DR. JILL STEIN: Yes, we are. We will be filing, paying the filing fee and moving forward. Another very difficult challenge to the campaign is that the state of Wisconsin raised the cost. It was going to be $1.1 million, and then, the night before last, we learned it’s actually going to be $3.5 million, which I think just underscores that there’s something wrong with this picture, not only that our votes are being recorded on machines that are wide open, an invitation to tampering, to human and machine error, not only that our votes are not being properly safeguarded, but then, in addition, if we want to have reassurance, if we want to verify the vote, we, the citizens, have to raise millions of dollars in order to scrutinize the vote, in order to have assurance. And add to that that there’s, you know, enormous bureaucratic hurdles to doing this.
So, you know, part of our intent here is not only to reassure the American people that we can have confidence in this vote or to find problems if there are problems, as the system is extremely vulnerable to, but we want to move forward and build this movement for verified voting for election integrity, which was really born out of the 2004 recount. For example, in 2004, the city of Toledo, largely the communities of color, filed for a recount because they felt like their votes were not being properly counted and respected. And what they found in that case, when they did a hand recount, was 90,000 votes that had not been counted simply because the voting counting machines, so-called optical scanners, had been miscalibrated. So they were not quite at the proper angle that they could actually see the vote and count the vote. There are innumerable cases where, when we look, we find problems. So it’s really important to look. But it’s also really important for us to change the way that we do this and to get rid of these electronic voting machines, which are an invitation to trouble across the board.
AMY GOODMAN: We’re going to be speaking with Bruce Schneier in a moment about hacking. New York magazine said, in Wisconsin, Hillary Clinton faced 7—”received 7 percent fewer votes in counties that relied on electronic-voting machines compared with counties that used optical scanners and paper ballots.”
But I wanted to ask you about a petition posted on the website of Margaret Flowers, the former Maryland Green Party candidate for Senate. The petition is titled “Greens Speak Out on Recount and Our Commitment to an Independent Party.” It says, in part, “The decision to pursue a recount was not made in a democratic or a strategic way, nor did it respect the established decision making processes and structures of the Green Party of the United States. … [T]his recount does not address the disenfranchisement of voters; it recounts votes that were already counted rather than restoring the suffrage of voters who were prevented from voting.” The petition was signed by several prominent Green Party members and supporters, including Margaret Flowers, your former adviser Kevin Zeese, former Green Party vice-presidential candidate Rosa Clemente and Pulitzer Prize-winning journalist Chris Hedges. Jill, your running mate, Ajamu Baraka, did not sign the petition but has also come out against the recount. Can you respond to this criticism?
DR. JILL STEIN: Yes. You know, the Green Party has many things to do, and many people are not enthusiastic about verified voting, about election integrity. The Green Party has a broad set of commitments, including continuing the momentum and the grassroots organizing that came out of the campaign. And I’m actually very grateful that many people are continuing to do that and that that is their priority. I, myself, had great ambivalence about moving forward with this.
In 2006, I ran for secretary of state here in my home state, in Massachusetts, so I have a long-standing commitment to voting integrity. And it’s not just counting votes and getting rid of these very problematic voting machines. It’s also ensuring that every—every American has a constitutional right to vote. And Donald Trump said the opposite of what has happened. The problem is not that people were voting illegally, but rather that people were stripped from the voter rolls through—through things like Interstate Crosscheck, also through the use of voter ID. Now, that’s not addressed in this case, but this case is a launching pad for a broader agenda that includes ensuring that we have a democratic right to vote, a constitutional right to vote, ensuring that we have open debates so that voters can actually be informed and empowered to make wise choices. And another priority is to ending fear-based voting through ranked-choice voting, like the state of Maine just passed, which means you can go into the voting booth and rank your choices, knowing that your first choice will be—if it loses, your vote will be reassigned to your second choice. This is part of a critical voting agenda, as well as getting rid of the Electoral College. So there are many things that need to be done. This is a point of departure which actually allows us Greens to lead the way forward on a critical and immediate need.
AMY GOODMAN: So, Dr. Jill Stein, some of the criticism of people even within your own party, though you have the right as a presidential candidate to ask for this on your own, has been that you’re only choosing states—Wisconsin, Pennsylvania, Michigan—where Hillary Clinton lost, not close states where she won. And they’re saying you’re serving the very party that you were so fiercely critical of during the campaign.
DR. JILL STEIN: And I remain fiercely critical of that party. That party should be—
AMY GOODMAN: They are joining you in this, is that right, in supporting your call for recount?
DR. JILL STEIN: Not in any coordinated way. We stepped up to the plate, because they had not. They did not express their support until the deadline had passed for filing in Wisconsin. Our lawyers are communicating so that they do not legally get in each other’s way, but we are otherwise not coordinating. And as I say, I’ve been committed to this issue for many years. So, for me, this is kind of like breathing. It was something that would have been virtually impossible for me not to do. Throughout the campaign, when I was asked whether I would stand up and call for a recount if there was cause to be concerned about the reliability and the credibility of the vote, I always said, yes, I would, and it had nothing to do with who won. And you may recall that Michigan did not actually—was not decided as a Trump state until we had already announced that we would be launching a recount in Michigan. It could have gone to Hillary—to Hillary Clinton.
AMY GOODMAN: And what about—
DR. JILL STEIN: And we would have still challenged it.
AMY GOODMAN: What about those who are saying you’re using this as a fundraising device? You’ve raised almost double—and I also want to ask if this has surprised you—than you raised in your entire campaign for this recount. And that, ultimately, you may use these for local Green Party candidates, what some have criticized—
DR. JILL STEIN: No, no, you can’t do that. Right, no, this is—FEC rules require that a recount be funded by a dedicated recount account, and the money can only be used for that. So, it would be great to have access to that money, but we don’t have access to that money. And since Wisconsin raised the price tag on us, there is no way that there will be residual money. This is all going into the recount.
AMY GOODMAN: On Monday—
DR. JILL STEIN: And it’s funded by small donors. You know, this is a grassroots movement all across America—140,000. Yes, I was absolutely flabbergasted, because we launched this the day before Thanksgiving. Who in their right mind was going to be paying attention to, you know, the call for a recount and fundraising over the Thanksgiving weekend?
AMY GOODMAN: Is it—
DR. JILL STEIN: But that’s exactly what happened, because people are starving for something positive to do to actually begin to take back this promise of democracy.
AMY GOODMAN: Is it all—is it all small donors?
DR. JILL STEIN: Yes, it is, because we are following campaign finance laws, like as if for our campaign. So, the average donation is $45. One-half of 1 percent of donors contributed more than $1,000. And the absolute maximum is the maximum you can contribute to a political campaign, which is $2,700.
AMY GOODMAN: On Monday—
DR. JILL STEIN: So there is no deep account here for deep pockets.
AMY GOODMAN: Monday night, I was at the Free Library in Philadelphia interviewing Vermont Senator Bernie Sanders, and I asked him about your recount effort.
SEN. BERNIE SANDERS: I think what most people expect is not much will happen, but we will see. But it touches on—so, in other words, all that they are doing is what happens all of the time. Nothing new about that. Recounts take place. When I was elected mayor, there was a recount. Right now in North Carolina, the Republican governor, who appears to be losing, wants a recount. Not a new idea. But I’ll tell you what it touches on, why it is touching a nerve, is not because I believe that it’s going to reverse the results. I don’t think that’s the case. But this is what people, especially with all of this barrage of attacks on websites and so forth, are really wondering, whether when they vote, is their vote legitimate? You know, and there’s talk: Have the Russians interfered in this thing? So that’s what it will deal, which takes us to another issue. And I wouldn’t have said this a few years ago, but I will say it tonight. I was just researching this. You know, in Canada, they still do their voting with paper ballots. And maybe it takes an extra hour or two to get the results out to the media, but they manage to survive. And I kind of think we should go back to paper ballots, lock them up. But I think—I think what this suit is about is touching on that issue and trying to see if the results end up being significantly different than what we were announced on election night.
AMY GOODMAN: That’s Bernie Sanders on Monday night. Jill Stein, your response?
DR. JILL STEIN: He’s absolutely right. And this should be built into our election system, that we should not be voting on these very tamper-friendly, error-prone machines in the first place. We should be voting on paper ballots that can be counted by these optical scanners, but they have to be checked with automatic audits. This should be, you know, built-in reassurance that should be part of our voting system. And whenever races are very close, there should be an automatic recount. And when there is suggestions of foul play or irregularities, there should be a recount, like in the Democratic Party primary. Bernie Sanders should have been the beneficiary of a recount and a potential challenge because of the stripping of voter rolls in Brooklyn, the failure to count hundreds of thousands of votes in California, that the Democratic—this is about holding the Democratic Party accountable to the same standard that we’re looking at in three Republican victory states. The reason we’re looking in those states is because you want to look at states that meet the criteria for high potential, high likelihood for having had error. And that means they’re razor-thin margins, the results went the opposite of what was anticipated, and they have some kind of a built-in vulnerability. And it happened that the three most significant states were those three. We didn’t know which way Michigan was going to go, but it turned out to go Republican. But if we have findings, then we have a case to go into many more states, including Democratic states.
AMY GOODMAN: Finally—finally, Jill Stein, are you somewhat disconcerted by not having the full support of the Green Party, and particularly Ajamu Baraka, your vice-presidential candidate, running mate, who said on CNN it’s potentially—the recounts are potentially a dangerous move?
DR. JILL STEIN: You know, the Green Party is a very—you’ve got a lot of opinions, and a lot of people are very well informed and very passionate. And we don’t often do things in the Green Party that we have uniform consensus on. So, I think, as this goes forward, that there will be more room for dialogue. And I think as we begin to see results that actually translate into a more secure voting system, that minds will change. The Greens, you know, are very focused on economic justice, racial justice, climate justice, you name it. And as a—for many Greens, especially newer Greens, electoral integrity has not been a priority. So I think, for many people, it’s a learning experience, and it’s a dialogue. And I think it’s—you know, it’s great that many people are continuing to do the other work, which is very important for us to continue.
AMY GOODMAN: Well, I want to thank you for being with us, Dr. Jill Stein, the 2016 and 2012 presidential nominee of the Green Party, leading the effort for an election recount in Wisconsin, Michigan and Pennsylvania. Later in the show, we’ll be speaking with cybersecurity researcher Bruce Schneier on why our voting system is vulnerable to hackers. But first, Harvard Law professor Lawrence Lessig will join us to talk about why he feels the Electoral College should choose Hillary Clinton over Donald Trump. We’ll be back with him in a minute.
wvParticipantI generally agree, but I am disappointed in Tavon’ lack of production on punt returns this year. I was hoping for a better year on special teams.
w
vDecember 2, 2016 at 10:36 am in reply to: How many promises will he break before inauguration? #59995wvParticipantI’ll probably regret this but honestly, I’m curious. Can Obama pardon someone for a crime they haven’t been convicted of? Or even charged with? How does that work?
===========
I wonder if Obama will pardon Trump for all the future-crimes he will perpetrate.
Every President goes to war against the poor, and commits war crimes along the way. So maybe every outgoing president should just go ahead and pardon the incoming President for their future-crimes. Ya know. Just to make it all official.
I’m also wondering if Obama will pardon Jeff Fisher for what he’s done for the last five years. 🙂
w
vDecember 2, 2016 at 9:26 am in reply to: Need a new header. Chris Long is no longer on the team. #59982wvParticipantI think Jason Sehorn should be on the header. I mean this is an odd, quirky site. I just think it would confuse people.
wvParticipantI dont want them in LA. They belong in San Diego.
Build a wall.
w
vDecember 1, 2016 at 9:56 pm in reply to: How many promises will he break before inauguration? #59960wvParticipantHe’s not building the wall let alone have Mexico pay for it, he’s not repealing Obamacare, he’s not going to convict Hillary…aren’t those three promises the reason why about 75% of his supporters voted for him?
http://www.newsweek.com/keeping-score-donald-trump-campaign-promises-526391
Well, he isn’t keeping his promises because he failed to keep the promise that all the others depend upon: draining the swamp. You don’t bring in Insiders to revolutionize the status quo.
Since he brought in insiders, there is no way he is going to do much of anything outside the box except some stuff for showbiz. The areas where he is capable of changing things (i.e.causing significant damage) are areas where he didn’t make any real promises in the first place: SCOUTUS, EPA, etc. But he isn’t going to do the big three.
————-
NExt election might be really interesting. If an ‘actual’ progressive runs against the Billionaire with a four year record — should be interesting.One wonders, btw, who the MSM would support in a race between an incumbent Billionaire-Republican and a Bernie-type-Progressive ?
Trump wont be able to run as an ‘outsider’ next time.
w
vDecember 1, 2016 at 7:15 pm in reply to: Scouting QB Jared Goff After 2 Games; LA Rams vs NE Patriots #59954wvParticipantSomeone else noted that what separates him from other QBs is
his ability to:
move away from trouble
and then zing it accurately and quickly — because he finds his balance again instantly. I mean he may ‘look’ offbalance but he’s not. He’s got some sort of ‘gumby-ability’ thing goin on.Thats what i see, anyway.
Its an unusual talent.
Wentz dont have it.
w
vwvParticipantI blame Karjakin’s offensive coordinator.
link:
w
v
Champion Carlsen thanks his father
December 1, 2016There were lots of people and organizations that Norwegian chess superstar Magnus Carlsen needed and wanted to thank after becoming World Chess Champion for the third time in a row on Wednesday night. …
Carlsen beat Russia’s Sergey Karjarkin in what amounted to the 16th game in overtime, by what some chess commetators called both a genialt move and a “stylish queen sacrifice” (external link) that will always be remembered. “I was very satisfied with that move,” Carlsen said later. “I was a fun way to end the match.” Others launched into superlatives: “It was the kind of move every chess player dreams about getting a chance to make,” commentator Maurice Ashley told NRK, after Carlsen sacrificed one of his strongest pieces to win. Such chances rarely arise, and it’s even more seldom that players find themselves able to make it. “That move will be remembered forever,” Ashley said.
…Magnus Carlsen admitted he faced a huge challenge, up against Sergey Karjakin of Russia. Karjakin was not happy about losing his stab at the World Championship title, but said Carlsen deserved to win. PHOTO: NRK screen grab/newsinenglish.no
He was mostly hungry: “I haven’t eaten for many hours, so I look forward to eat,” he said at the outset, going on to admit that “I’m exhausted but very relieved to be finished” with the championship match. “The championship title (which he’ll now retain for the next two years before needing to defend it again) means a lot to me and everyone who follows me.”
Carlsen and Karjakin had played to two draws in the tie-breaker round of four rapid chess games on Wednesday, but Carlsen dominated the last two. He said he was especially satisfied with his final move that led to checkmate against Karjakin.
Carlsen’s Russian challenger, who also is 26 years old, won great respect during the marathon championships, and also “won many friends and fans in Norway,” according to NRK commentators, because of his skills, strong defense and “sympathetic” demeanor. Even after Carlsen had a temper tantrum of sorts and stormed out of an obligatory press conference after losing a game to Karjakin, the young Russian was gracious and complimented Carlsen’s play. He was equally so after losing the championship to Carlsen with millions of Russians watching back home on TV and video links in the middle of the night local time.
“Magnus deserves to win,” Karjakin said, noting that Carlsen had gained on Karjakin’s own mistakes. “I did my best, but it didn’t hold up.” He also said that “after 12 classical games, I was not ready” for the tie-breaker rounds of rapid chess. “It was a very difficult match,” Karjakin said. “I didn’t make it work.”
A lucrative consolation prize was waiting, though. The match, with sponsors including EG Capital Investors and Russian fertilizer company PhosAgro that competes against Norway’s own Yara, had a prize fund of EUR 1 million (around USD 1.1 million) with the winner getting 55 percent and the loser 45 percent.
Asked if he would try again to win the Candidates Tournament in order to challenge Carlsen for the World Champion title again in 2018, Karjakin told WorldChess.com, “that’s the plan.”
newsinenglish.no/Nina Berglund
wvParticipantThat commentary was funny.
w
vwvParticipant=====================
Rampage2k
Polian…Was very impressed with Goff though, words like “outstanding” “deadly accurate” “confident” “unflappable” “gonna be a good one” we’re used by him describing what he saw.
=============Wouldn’t you agree with all that? IE the description of Goff.
I agree with all that….
————–
Oh yeah. Goff looks like a future star to me.w
vwvParticipantBut the MSM is never right about anything. So nothing new there. The issue for me then is not whether the MSM “says the right things” (it never does) but whether leftists are divisive or forge alliances.
To me, that doesn’t justify sentences like this from Mr. Goose: Socialists reject racialist politics in whatever form it appears. In the context of the 2016 elections, this means repudiating the racialist and nationalist FILTH promulgated by both the Democrats and Republicans and all those who orbit around bourgeois politics.
That’s not what bell hooks is saying in your quotation there. She’s saying the opposite:
I think that we need to strategically go for that framework of understanding which is missing, rather than to assume that one framework should always be centered on.
He IS saying one framework should be centered on.
—————-
I totally see your point about the purist-socialist’s language.And i totally get your annoyance about it.
And i wish there were MORE annoying shit-stirring articles like it.
Not cause I agree with the language. But because I think somehow, someway, the CLASS argument has to be presented to the identity-politics folks. I just want the conversation STARTED. Somehow, someway. If all i can have is THAT kind of purist bullshit article — I’ll take it. As a start. Its a process.
w
vwvParticipantI’d say that bolded Demoff quote tells us a lot. Looks like the next five games matter.
w
v————————-
link:http://www.latimes.com/sports/rams/la-sp-rams-fisher-plaschke-20161129-story.html
…on Tuesday, Demoff directly addressed the perception that his team is a mess, credibly facing the criticism.“This was not going to be a ‘snap your fingers and have a change overnight,’ ’’ he said. “There’s a lot of work to be done to grow this fan base.’’
No, Demoff didn’t fire Fisher on the spot like many fans would have hoped, but he pointedly acknowledged the final five games could determine the direction of the organization.
“Jeff has done a tremendous job handling the distractions of this off-season … but at the end of the day, we all need more wins,’’ Demoff said. “How this team responds to adversity, how we get better, the progress Jared shows, the form the defense shows … that’s what these last five weeks are all about. That will tell us a lot about whether we have the right pieces to move forward in 2017.’’
Considering those five games include contests with three current division leaders, Fisher’s chances don’t look good, especially since Demoff kept mentioning the “hope” that has been so absent.
“We can’t change the first 11 games, but we still have the last five games, and most important is that we can show that hope for next year,’’ Demoff said.
November 30, 2016 at 1:02 pm in reply to: informal poll: should the Patz even bother to show up? #59850wvParticipantRams play inspired, rowdy football, and it works for a half.
And then Belichick simply outcoaches Fisher, and Brady outplays the rookie.
Hekker booms a 90 yarder… due to the Pats over-inflating the rams balls.
Rams 20
Pats 31And after the game, Pats fans ask “whats wrong with the Pats, they only
scored 31 on the Rams”w
vwvParticipantWell, i think its fine for Demoff to raise the issue of ‘context.’
And sure its fine to remind fans to look at more than just ‘the record’.In the end though, each fan is going to weigh things however they want. And wv-ram-fan has had enough.
And of course Kronky will do whatever he wants.
w
vwvParticipantPerhaps less partying and more practice?
————
But they sucked in St.Louis too for the past gazillion years.
So its gotta be more than pool-parties.
Plus we know teams win championships in LA so players
do seem to be able to cope with distractions in LA in general.w
vNovember 30, 2016 at 12:48 pm in reply to: Class, race, inequality within the black community #59847wvParticipantHooks and I see this the same way. You have to look at all The Things. Which why I said it’s alliance politics.
Your goose-stepping world socialist guy was dismissing race and gender (on the basis of a very bad argument on top of it). That’s not what me n bell hooks do.
————-
Well, first off, i like the goose-stepping guy just fine, and i think we need his point of view. Even though ultimately, i agree that CLASS-race-gender are ALL important and mixed together, etc.But here’s why i like goose-stepping guy and i wish there were more goose-stepping articles and not less — WHICH of the big three — race, gender, class — gets ignored in the MSM and in America in general? You KNOW the answer is Class. The other two big-issues are much more accessible to mainstreamers.
But Class gets ignored, for lots of reasons i dont need to tell you about.
So, i think a little shit-stirring might be ok, when it comes to goose-stepping articles and such. They might make people want to argue about CLASS. They might make people wonder what the hell that guy is so upset about….etc.
Now, IN THE END, i think Race-class-gender have to be joined. In the end all those groups need to battle TOGETHER. But right now ONE of those issues aint even at the party. And so, i dont mind a shit-stirring article full of wrong-headed divisive ideas. Its no different to me than supporting BLACK lives matter. Instead of ALL lives matter. Sure all lives matter, but right now, at this point we need some shit-stirring about BLACK lives mattering.
Same with Class. POOR people matter. Right now. Maybe someday we can say ALL people matter. Not there yet. And i think bell hooks would agree with everything i just wrote. 🙂
w
vwvParticipantThe obsession with race and gender involves the striving for privileges by a layer of black and female professionals, determined to carve out careers and incomes—under conditions of an intensely competitive “marketplace”—at the expense of their white or male counterparts.
This is such bullshit.
Who wrote this?
This is not the time to be divisive that way.
With people striving for doctrinaire ideological purity and the divisions that entails.
A real left is a collection of affiliations. Different interests and viewpoints, acting in alliance.
This guy sounds like a goose-stepping “let’s be uniform about this” type.
There will never be an successful american left that approaches it that way. That just means in-fighting.
===========
You are rarely so emotional, zn 🙂
I actually agree with a lot of what the writer says. And i also agree with what you have said.
And i agree with bell hooks. Again.
w
v
“… I’m actually for a more communal division of labor. If we have a community where people seem to be more hip about gender, but not very hip about class, then I think that we need to strategically go for that framework of understanding which is missing, rather than to assume that one framework should always be centered on. I believe that Black women are very susceptible to bourgeois hedonistic consumerism because women are so much the targets of mass media. So, clearly, a lot of critical thinking about materialism in our lives is crucial to engaging Black women in revolutionary struggle. So that class, again, comes up and we haven’t had enough Black women leaders.
But the point is, we need to also know how some of these women, many of whom came from bourgeois families, began to acquire a more revolutionary consciousness–if, indeed, they have acquired that consciousness. It’s also easier, a lot of times, for Black women to talk about gender and ignore class because many of us are non-divesting of our support of capitalism and our longing for luxury. I think that it’s one thing to enjoy the good life and to enjoy beauty and things, and another thing to feel like you’re willing to support the killing of other people in other countries so that you can have your fine car and other luxuries. …” bell hooks“We don’t hear much from revolutionary feminists who are white because they’re not serving the bourgeois agenda of the status quo. They’re a small minority, but they are there and they are useful allies in the struggle. So I try not to use those monolithic terms anymore that I used in the beginning with Ain’t I A Woman…’ bell hooks
wvParticipantI think that vid is about two weeks old, so i’ve been trying to find out if the DNC has made any final decisions on the leadership, etc.
w
vwvParticipantDemoff has been banned from St.Louis, btw.
They wont even give him luxury boxes.
w
vwvParticipantA lot of good that will do. That clueless old coot is releasing it in beta max.
The only exercise I get is when I walk the dogs or go birding…neither of which would qualify as aerobic exercise.
———-
Well you’ll probly out-live us all.
You’ll be the last living Ram fan. It’ll be like a twilight zone episode.
w
vwvParticipantI wish I could get motivated to exercise. I’m heavier now than at any point in my life. But I just hate it so much.
———–
Have you tried zooey’s cussing program?
I think he’s coming out with a video.
w
vwvParticipantI had to build my way up, but I do lots of pushups. I can do 54 at one time.
———–
Damn. 54. I think that is a board record.
w
vwvParticipantI don’t have a problem with them banning ED from the sideline. I mean, that’s where the team needs to be a team. You can’t have someone destroy a coach on tv and then you have to see them with you on game day.
I certainly wouldn’t want to work under those conditions.
If ED loves the Rams, he should do whatever it takes to HELP them. Publicly humiliating them is not really helping them IMO.—————-
I would ban him for all the fumbling he did.Faulk didn’t fumble.
I think Cleveland Gary should be banned from the games too.
And Elvis Peacock.w
vwvParticipantCorbett report: media war has begun
-
This reply was modified 9 years, 5 months ago by
wv.
wvParticipant===============
Journalists Denounce WaPo Fake News Blacklist as Red Scare Redux“Basically, everyone who isn’t comfortably within the centrist Hillary Clinton/Jeb Bush spectrum is guilty.”
by
Lauren McCauley, staff writer
link:http://www.commondreams.org/news/2016/11/28/journalists-denounce-wapo-fake-news-blacklist-red-scare-reduxThe Washington Post’s promotion of a new, “McCarthyistic” so-called black list has journalists aghast over what appears to be a red scare redux, as independent news outlets critical of U.S. foreign policy are being smeared as “Russian propaganda.”
“Now that we have entered a New Cold War, I suppose it makes sense that we should expect a New McCarthyism,” writes Robert Parry, investigative journalist and editor of Consortium News, which was one of the websites flagged by the anonymous organization PropOrNot as a “Russian propaganda outlet.”
Last week, the Washington Post published a feature story citing PropOrNot and other supposed “experts” who allege that “Russia’s increasingly sophisticated propaganda machinery” was behind the rise of “fake news,” which they say spread false information about Democratic nominee Hillary Clinton, fueling the rise of Donald Trump.
The fake news was disseminated and amplified by an “online echo chamber,” WaPo’s Craig Timberg reported, which included players who “were knowingly part of the propaganda campaign…while others were ‘useful idiots’— a term born of the Cold War to describe people or institutions that unknowingly assisted Soviet Union propaganda efforts.”
PropOrNot claims that stories planted or promoted by this campaign were viewed on Facebook more than 213 million times.
But the outlets being singled out by the group, and thus smeared by the Post, run the gamut politically, with the only seeming connection being that they “do not uncritically echo a pro-NATO perspective,” as journalists Ben Norton and Glenn Greenwald point out.
In a searing take-down published at The Intercept on Saturday, Norton and Greenwald accuse PropOrNot of committing “outright defamation” for “slandering obviously legitimate news sites as propaganda tools of the Kremlin.”
While some, namely Sputnik News and Russia Today, are funded by the Russian government, those sites are listed alongside a host of others who do not warrant this categorization. They write:
Included on this blacklist of supposed propaganda outlets are prominent independent left-wing news sites such as Truthout, Naked Capitalism, Black Agenda Report, Consortium News, and Truthdig.
Also included are popular libertarian hubs such as Zero Hedge, Antiwar.com, and the Ron Paul Institute, along with the hugely influential right-wing website the Drudge Report and the publishing site WikiLeaks. Far-right, virulently anti-Muslim blogs such as Bare Naked Islam are likewise dubbed Kremlin mouthpieces. Basically, everyone who isn’t comfortably within the centrist Hillary Clinton/Jeb Bush spectrum is guilty.
Norton and Greenwald also lambast the Washington Post for its “shoddy, slothful” reporting. Among the piece’s shortcomings, they note, is that Timberg failed to include a link to PropOrNot’s website.
“If readers had the opportunity to visit the site,” they write, “it would have become instantly apparent that this group of ostensible experts far more resembles amateur peddlers of primitive, shallow propagandistic clichés than serious, substantive analysis and expertise; that it has a blatant, demonstrable bias in promoting NATO’s narrative about the world; and that it is engaging in extremely dubious McCarthyite tactics about a wide range of critics and dissenters.”
What’s more, The Intercept notes, the problematic exposé “was one of the most widely circulated political news articles on social media” following its publication, which has far-ranging consequences.
Fortune columnist Mathew Ingram similarly lamented the dangers of lumping “anyone who shared a salacious but untrue news story about Hillary Clinton as an agent of an orchestrated Russian intelligence campaign.”
“Has the rise of fake news played into the hands of those who want to spread disinformation? Sure it has,” Ingram wrote. “But connecting hundreds of Twitter accounts into a dark web of Russian-controlled agents, along with any website that sits on some poorly thought-out blacklist, seems like the beginnings of a conspiracy theory, rather than a scientific analysis of the problem.”
wvParticipantSeems like a minor but embarrassing snit, to me.
I dont think Kronky cares about ED’s feelings.
My ‘guess’ is no-one will be talking about ED a week from now.
w
vOn the other hand since they moved back to LA the Rams have made a point to reconnect to former Rams players and the team’s history – both of which they were accused of abandoning when they moved to St Louis.
Given Demoff’s reaction the alienatation of fan favorite Eric Dickerson who has a popular podcast/radio show isn’t something the Rams are going to allow regardless of how Fisher may feel.
This sort of stuff means nothing when you’re winning but when you’re losing it can become a big deal – the final straw sort of big deal.
————-
Maybe but i think it all goes down the media memory hole after about one week. Two at the tops. It’ll get talked-up during the Pats game, and then it’ll slowly disappear.w
vwvParticipantSeems like a minor but embarrassing snit, to me.
I dont think Kronky cares about ED’s feelings.
My ‘guess’ is no-one will be talking about ED a week from now.
w
vwvParticipantThe losses mount. The criticism mounts.
One would hope they do not get blown out a second game in a row.
w
vwvParticipantGoff does seem a bit miscast in the Rams’ offense as he excels in throwing well-placed throws to the deep and intermediate levels and he is playing in a shallow crossing route offense.
Man. It’s going to be a while I think before that kind of myth-over-fact stuff goes away.
It is true the Rams have had some qbs who could not deliver in the intermediate ranges. It is not true they don’t throw deep…they always do.
But they took Goff because, among other reasons, they want what he brings to the passing game.
This idea that they inherently DON’T do those things because of their offensive philosophy is just nonsense.
————
agreed.w
vwvParticipantShould a no. 2 pick need that? Well many have. GR won’t be the first. If he is redeemable, then, he will be one of the few no. 2 picks over the years who struggled, who then WAS redeemed. Most no. 2 picks that struggle, then just fail.
Yea…I agree with all of that
As I said though, I haven’t lost all faith in the guy yet. I still think if he washes out at LT he can plug in at guard.
I have a case of the Monday Redface after that 2nd half yesterday.
—————-
Well we’ll see if his ‘break’ does any good. I’m skeptical, but it couldnt hurt, i suppose.I’m just a no-nothing fan squawking here, but I like the idea of him at Guard. If i was Snead I’d be looking to find a new LT, and plug Grob in at guard. That way you have a powerful guard who can always fill in at LT if need be.
I know its hard finding solid LT’s but I’d sure as heck start or continue looking.
w
v -
This reply was modified 9 years, 5 months ago by
-
AuthorPosts
