HomeUncategorized1/9/2019 Afternoon/Evening Open Thread: Jeff Weaver Will not be Campaign Mgr for Bernie2020; Steyer Sits Out of 2020 & News
avatar
Photo and Image Files
 
 
 
Audio and Video Files
 
 
 
Other File Types
 
 
 
41 Comment threads
52 Thread replies
0 Followers
 
Most reacted comment
Hottest comment thread
8 Comment authors
EyeRoundwi60humphreypolarbear4orlbucfan Recent comment authors

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.

  Subscribe  
newest oldest most voted
Notify of
jcitybone

Hopefully, voting will soon get easier in NJ and NY. Im praying that Cuomo is being honest because he wasn’t helpful in this area previously

Now, in New Jersey, Gov. Philip D. Murphy, a Democrat, is pursuing a series of bills that would significantly expand access to the ballot for hundreds of thousands of voters.

“The package of reforms in New Jersey would place the state at the forefront of the country in terms of voter access,” said Wendy R. Weiser, the director of the Democracy Program at the Brennan Center for Justice.

The bills call for changes across the electoral spectrum: allowing online voter registration and early voting up to 30 days before an election; same-day voter registration; permitting those on parole and probation to vote; and making 17-year-olds who turn 18 by the general election eligible to vote in party primaries.

In New York, Gov. Andrew M. Cuomo, a Democrat, has called for similar reforms as Mr. Murphy and proposed that Election Day be declared a state holiday.

Mr. Cuomo has said that past efforts to change voting laws have been stymied by a divided Legislature. Now, with Democrats in control of the Assembly and the Senate, Mr. Cuomo has said he believes he can pass meaningful electoral reforms.

humphrey

Bullshit! Cuomo was OK with the divided legislature it kept progressive legislation from being enacted. He had no real problem with the Dems caucusing with the Republicans until he had a viable primary challenge. The extremely early voter registration deadline played into his hands, The Brooklyn voter purge didn’t seem to bother his as it likely would have helped Bernie.

Also too. He just endorsed Biden.

jcitybone

Yes it’s a lie (not only didn’t he have a problem with Dems caucusing with Republicans, he was the behind the scenes manipulator of that action), but I still want him to support voting reforms now that the turncoat Dems have been turned out.

jcitybone

https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/2019/01/09/health-care-democrats-arent-messing-around/?utm_term=.2905d7286cff

We don’t know how that debate is going to proceed over the next few years, or whether it will result in the United States finally joining every other industrialized country on Earth in having a system of universal health coverage guaranteed by the government. But there are some things we can say right now.

The first is that the debate has changed. Universal coverage generally, and single-payer specifically, which a short time ago were considered so radical they were barely worth discussing, are now part of any debate about our health-care future. Conservatives are horrified by that change, and still talk about universal coverage as though it was the equivalent of forcing all Americans to wait in line for bread wearing shapeless grey overcoats during a Moscow winter circa 1981. But conservatives have lost that first stage of the argument, in which we determine which policy options will be considered.

Second, universal coverage has become the default position of Democrats everywhere. There are certainly arguments about how to get there, but the argument within the Democratic Party is now about how to cover everyone, not whether to cover everyone. Every Democrat running for president in 2020 has either already embraced or will embrace universal coverage as a goal.

Third — and this is also new — as Democrats gain power, they will move aggressively to expand coverage, affordability, and security using any means available to them. It is similar to how when Republicans take power, they are immediately expected to cut taxes on businesses and the wealthy, and to restrict abortion rights. It’s probably what they want to do anyway, but if they had any hesitation, they know it’s what their constituents expect of them.

Much will depend on how successful some of these state-level experiments turn out to be. But the debate is now going to play out on terms that Democrats are setting.

polarbear4

Don’t have the article right now, but apparently Washington state’s proposal is Not really government, but rather govt. giving a platform to insurance corpses. There is a group that is fighting it.

LieparDestin

Any thoughts on who that campaign managermight be?

jcitybone

I wonder if a woman might be chosen

humphrey

Not a bad idea if she actually helped the campaign rather than being a token choice.

jcitybone

Yeah that’s essential, but I don’t think they would do that. For one thing, it’s too important a position. Plus I’m sure there are just as many women who could fill that roll as men.

humphrey

One thing for sure he won’t be hiring any Clinton veterans.?

humphrey

She could be a good choice.

She would fit right in with a M4All push.

humphrey

polarbear4

Yikes. Is she preparing us?

humphrey

I don’t think so. LOL How would this site stay in business?

jcitybone

According to Trump, here is why we need a wall

They’re driving in and they’re not coming through checkpoints, because you can’t have three or four people in the back with tape over your mouths and your hands tied and drive past someone who is checking out your van…The fact is if we don’t have barriers, walls, call them what you will, very strong barriers where people can not any longer drive right across. They have unbelievable vehicles. They make a lot of money. They have the best vehicles you can buy. They have stronger, bigger and faster vehicles than our police have and that ICE have and that Border Patrol have. They’re pretty good at that. They have areas they go to. It’s like a highway.

jcitybone

Good article about corporate media’s bias

http://nymag.com/intelligencer/2019/01/alexandria-ocasio-cortez-60-minutes-fact-check-critique-medicare-for-all.html

For this reason, a scrupulously objective “fact check” of the substantive claims in the Medicare for All debate would find that the “far left” position is stronger than the center-left and center-right ones (at least, from the utilitarian perspective that’s hegemonic in policy debates). But that conclusion is anathema to the worldview of the “vital center,” and to the conventions of view-from-nowhere journalism. And so, when a libertarian think tank scholar told Jake Tapper that Bernie Sanders was lying — and assured the CNN anchor that opponents of Medicare for All weren’t (effectively) arguing that America should spend more on health care to get less, for the sake of allowing a small minority of (largely wealthy) people to continue benefiting from a broken system — the CNN host took him at his word, and reported his spin as fact.

This notion — that a political faction’s proximity to the ideological center is tantamount to its concern for empirical truth — has inherent appeal to nonpartisan political analysts. A world in which factual reality consistently lies somewhere between the claims of left and right is a world in which journalists can “call balls and strikes” without compromising their perceived neutrality. But that is not the world we live in. In actually existing America, the “far left” demonstrated a keener appreciation for empirical truth than the center during the debates over whether Iraq harbored weapons of mass destruction; whether more stringent financial regulations were necessary in the early aughts; whether simply expanding public health insurance would prove more effective than creating complicated market exchanges; and whether expansionary austerity is an actually existing economic phenomenon (among many others).

And yet Susan Collins’s willingness to defend a package of tax cuts for the rich and corporations — a policy at the far-right fringe of American public opinion — by claiming that they would actually reduce the deficit has not led the mainstream press to portray her as a fact-averse, far-right extremist. In fact, just last week, the New York Times referred to Collins as one of the Senate’s “most moderate members.”

Ask yourself: Would the sum of total mainstream political coverage lead one to believe that Susan Collins is more committed to realism, ideological moderation, and evidenced-based policymaking than Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez is? And if so, might the latter have cause for questioning the objectivity of the “objective” media?

polarbear4

Excellent!!!!

jcitybone

https://www.burlingtonfreepress.com/story/news/politics/2019/01/09/bernie-sanders-peter-welch-forego-pay-during-federal-shutdown/2529428002/

Sen. Bernie Sanders, I-Vt., said on Wednesday he will donate his Senate pay to Vermont charities while federal employees go without paycheck during the partial shutdown of the federal government.

“If the Trump initiated shutdown is not resolved shortly, hundreds of thousands of federal employees will not receive their paychecks – including more than 1,300 Vermonters. I will do everything I can to end this destructive shutdown as soon as possible. During the time that federal employees do not receive a paycheck, I will be donating my U.S. Senate salary to Vermont charities.”

polarbear4

Moved.

polarbear4

humphrey

polarbear4

Yes!

humphrey

This pretty well sums it up.

humphrey

orlbucfan

Right up Ms. Nina’s alley–she’s a great inspirational speaker. Look at the young folks surrounding her. That pic speaks volumes! 🙂

humphrey

Trump finally got his wall.
comment image?resize=807×807

humphrey

comment image?resize=807×807

humphrey

humphrey

humphrey

humphrey

A perfect place for this.
comment image?resize=807×807

polarbear4

humphrey

Be careful. Crew is part of the David Brock network.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Citizens_for_Responsibility_and_Ethics_in_Washington

Chairmanships of David Brock and Richard Painter
In August 2014, liberal political operative David Brock was elected chairman of CREW’s board of directors. At the time, USA Today wrote that “One of the most vocal congressional ethics watchdog groups is becoming part of a Democratic political operation.”[10] Politico wrote that Brock’s newly announced involvement with CREW was a “major power play that aligns liberal muscle more fully behind the Democratic Party” and that CREW would add a “more politically oriented arm, expand its focus into state politics and donor targeting and will operate in close coordination with Brock’s growing fleet of aggressive Democrat-backing nonprofits and super PACs — Media Matters, American Bridge, and the American Independent Institute.”[11] Prior to Brock’s involvement with CREW, the group had aggressively targeted Republican public officials as well as some Democrats. The Center for Public Integrity wrote that “Many key staffers left soon after Brock became its chairman, and since then, the organization has almost exclusively pursued Republicans and conservative organizations through federal complaints and its own investigations.” In April 2016, Bloomberg reported that Republicans had faced the vast majority of CREW investigations in recent months.

Brock left CREW’s board of directors in December 2017, but did not cut ties with the group and continued to fundraise for it. He was replaced by former George W. Bush White House ethics lawyer Richard Painter, “lending the group a bipartisan air,” according to Politico.[14] Painter took a leave of absence from CREW to run as a Democrat in Minnesota’s 2018 U.S. Senate special election.

polarbear4

Ahhhh, thanks. Still, maybe they will inadvertently draw attention to the machines. Ivanka, China and voting machines can’t be a good thing.

Good to know tho.

orlbucfan

Sad about CREW. They were a decent outfit when they first started. I will avoid them now.

jcitybone

https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/hawaii-rep-tulsi-gabbard-accuses-fellow-democrats-of-religious-bigotry-in-questioning-judicial-nominee/2019/01/09/2c17ecdc-1467-11e9-90a8-136fa44b80ba_story.html?utm_term=.ab2c3fe87370&utm_source=reddit.com

Rep. Tulsi Gabbard, a potential 2020 White House contender, is accusing some of her fellow Democrats of “religious bigotry” in their questioning of one of President Trump’s judicial nominees.

Gabbard’s claim, made in an op-ed in the Hill newspaper, drew a rebuke Wednesday from another Hawaii Democrat, Sen. Mazie Hirono.

In the op-ed, Gabbard did not name any names. But she argued that some lawmakers had gone too far in their questioning of Brian Buescher, whom Trump nominated in October to serve as a district judge.

“While I oppose the nomination of Brian Buescher to the U.S. District Court in Nebraska, I stand strongly against those who are fomenting religious bigotry, citing as disqualifiers Buescher’s Catholicism and his affiliation with the Knights of Columbus,” Gabbard said in the op-ed.

Hirono’s office responded Wednesday that Gabbard was mischaracterizing her questioning of Buescher, and that the senator was voicing her concerns about the nominee’s past public statements rather than his religion.

“It is unfortunate that Congresswoman Gabbard based her misguided opinion on the far-right wing manipulation of these straightforward questions,” Hirono spokesman Will Dempster said in a statement.

He added that over the past two years, Hirono “has been attacked by right wing ideologues for her examination of Donald Trump’s ideologically-driven nominees to the courts.”

“Senator Hirono asks all judicial nominees — particularly those who have expressed very strong personal ideological views in conflict with Supreme Court precedent — if they can be fair,” Dempster said. “She asked Mr. Buescher, who has a clear record of anti-choice activism, whether he could separate his personal beliefs from decisions he would make if confirmed for a lifetime appointment on the federal bench.”

humphrey

In order to be fair her is Tulsi Gabbard’s op-ed.

https://thehill.com/blogs/congress-blog/religious-rights/424362-elected-leaders-who-weaponize-religion-are-playing-a

For too long in our country, politicians have weaponized religion for their own selfish gain, fomenting bigotry, fears and suspicions based on the faith, religion or spiritual practices of their political opponents.

Whether we think of ourselves as Christians, Hindus, Muslims, Sikh, Buddhists, Jews, atheists, agnostics, or anything else, it is imperative that we stand united in our commitment to protect religious freedom and the right to worship or not worship, safely and without the fear of retribution.

We must stand together, and with one voice condemn those who seek to incite bigotry based on religion. We cannot allow those who are anxious to exploit our differences to drive a wedge between us. We cannot and will not tolerate prejudicial treatment of those with whom we disagree, any more than we would tolerate such treatment of those with whom we agree.

While I oppose the nomination of Brian Buescher to the U.S. District Court in Nebraska, I stand strongly against those who are fomenting religious bigotry, citing as disqualifiers Buescher’s Catholicism and his affiliation with the Knights of Columbus. If Buescher is “unqualified” because of his Catholicism and affiliation with the Knights of Columbus, then President John F. Kennedy, and the ‘liberal lion of the Senate’ Ted Kennedy would have been “unqualified” for the same reasons.
Article 6 of the U.S. Constitution clearly states that there “shall be no religious test” for any seeking to serve in public office.

jcitybone

?

polarbear4

We can’t be this far gone, can we? Apparently the MSM are treating it as legitimate.

” MintPress News Editor-in-Chief Mnar Muhawesh recently wrote, MintPress was informed that it was under review by an organization called Newsguard Technologies, which described itself to MintPress as simply a “news rating agency” and asked Muhawesh to comment on a series of allegations, several of which were blatantly untrue. However, further examination of this organization reveals that it is funded by and deeply connected to the U.S. government, neo-conservatives, and powerful monied interests, all of whom have been working overtime since the 2016 election to silence dissent to American forever-wars and corporate-led oligarchy.

More troubling still, Newsguard — by virtue of its deep connections to government and Silicon Valley — is lobbying to have its rankings of news sites installed by default on computers in U.S. public libraries, schools, and universities as well as on all smartphones and computers sold in the United States.

In other words, as Newsguard’s project advances, it will soon become almost impossible to avoid this neocon-approved news site’s ranking systems on any technological device sold in the United States. Worse still, if its efforts to quash dissenting voices in the U.S. are successful, Newsguard promises that its next move will be to take its system global.“

Much more….

polarbear4

“NewsGuard directly markets the browser plug-in to libraries, schools and internet users in general.”

And stats say it affects the public.

I’m scared by this.

polarbear4

?. Not just me.

humphrey

The Caitlin article is a goodread. However I can’t really say that anything in it surprises me. I have seen where progressive youtubers like Jamarl Thomas have been demonetized for periods of time. They want to control our access to information.

polarbear4

polarbear4

OMG. ? forward to using one of these.

humphrey

humphrey

polarbear4

humphrey

polarbear4

Skip to toolbar