[Peace-discuss] [OccupyCU] Perfidious Democrats (in Illinois, as elsewhere)

Sun Jul 12 14:18:16 EDT 2015

How do you compromise with Obama’s pro-war pro-Wall St. policies? 

Agree to let him kill some children but not others? Agree to let the banks take some people’s homes and jobs but not others? Shut off water to some cities but not others?

Surely that’s better than the opposites, but we want to stop him from doing it, not justify it as ‘compromise.’

We don’t want to compromise with Democrat policies, but reverse them.  

> On Jul 12, 2015, at 12:39 PM, Stan <swag901 at ymail.com> wrote:
> 
> Yes it is always so effective to walk into the meeting room with no proof of success on your side, and expect the masses to jump up and run to your side.
> The art of politics, to a very real extent, is really the art of compromise. Unless you want to be the bully, rather than the teacher.
> 
> Sent from my Verizon Wireless 4G LTE DROID
> On Jul 11, 2015 6:35 PM, "C. G. Estabrook" <carl at newsfromneptune.com> wrote:
> If Democrats want to be certain that terrible Republicans aren’t elected, let them withdraw in favor of Greens, rather than ask Greens to withdraw in their favor. The Democrats don’t own the votes.
> 
> “It is better to vote for what you want and not get it than to vote for what you don't want and get it.” —ascribed to Eugene Debs
> 
> "Let me say from the very beginning that we at Black Agenda Report do not think that Barack Obama is the Lesser Evil. He is the more Effective Evil.”  —Glen Ford
> <http://blackagendareport.com/content/why-barack-obama-more-effective-evil <http://blackagendareport.com/content/why-barack-obama-more-effective-evil>>. 
> 
> And it's not an argument for voting for an incumbent responsible for unconscionable acts that his opponent may be worse. The opponent in office may be instructed by the rejection of the current incumbent.
> 
> That also holds true for an incumbent's successor of the same party. To reject Obama's pro-war and pro-Wall Street policies, one should vote against Clinton, whoever her Republican opponent is.
> 
> —CGE
> 
> 
>> On Jul 11, 2015, at 6:02 PM, Stan via Peace-discuss <peace-discuss at lists.chambana.net <mailto:peace-discuss at lists.chambana.net>> wrote:
>> 
>> To answer the question, no it has not been tried.
>> People that try run up against the corporate shield (of sorts) and give up.
>> What the Green Party does is give guys like Bush 43, and Rodney Davis to just name 2. Nationwide the number is possibly enough to swing the House of Representatives Republican. That means we get the John Boehners, and Mitch McConnels in leadership.
>> The Tea Party was smart enough as a group to take over a large part of the Republican Party. Now just look at the extremism in the right's presidential candidates.
>> Keep working outside the Democratic Party and you insure the country will swing further right.
>> 
>> Sent from my Verizon Wireless 4G LTE DROID
>> On Jul 10, 2015 5:16 PM, Karen Aram <karenaram at hotmail.com <mailto:karenaram at hotmail.com>> wrote:
>> In answer to Stan
>>  
>> Haven't we tried that, taking over the Democrat Party? It doesn't appear to have gotten us anywhere, most of the dems, certainly not all, are owned by the corporations, not conspiracy theory, simply a fact, ownership comes in many forms. Bribery, threats, social pressure, requirements for compromise on issues of lesser importance, which often means "foreign policy" for those with primarily domestic concerns. That's why I don't support Bernie. 
>> I will support any democrat who is willing to support some of the goals of the Green Party against a republican, I am willing to support Carol, if she is willing to speak with us, as she has indicated she will do, and convince us that she will do the right thing and the abstention on BDS was a mistake. 
>> Rather than retribution, I seek solutions. However, I agree with Carl and others that it's time to build a third party with "foreign policy" a major concern, as we certainly haven't gotten that from the Democratic Party. 
>>  
>> Date: Fri, 10 Jul 2015 15:55:19 -0500
>> To: occupycu at lists.chambana.net <mailto:occupycu at lists.chambana.net>
>> CC: peace-discuss at anti-war.net <mailto:peace-discuss at anti-war.net>; sf-core at yahoogroups.com <mailto:sf-core at yahoogroups.com>; carl at newsfromneptune.com <mailto:carl at newsfromneptune.com>
>> Subject: Re: [Peace-discuss] [OccupyCU] Perfidious Democrats (in Illinois,	as elsewhere)
>> From: peace-discuss at lists.chambana.net <mailto:peace-discuss at lists.chambana.net>
>> 
>> The green party just guarantees Republican domination.
>> What we need to do is follow the Tea Party example, and take over the Democratic Party.
>> 
>> Sent from my Verizon Wireless 4G LTE DROID
>> On Jul 9, 2015 9:30 PM, Karen Aram via OccupyCU <occupycu at lists.chambana.net <mailto:occupycu at lists.chambana.net>> wrote:
>> A perfect example as to why we need the Green Party.
>>  
>> > Date: Thu, 9 Jul 2015 21:18:03 -0500
>> > To: peace-discuss at anti-war.net <mailto:peace-discuss at anti-war.net>
>> > CC: sf-core at yahoogroups.com <mailto:sf-core at yahoogroups.com>; occupyCU at lists.chambana.net <mailto:occupyCU at lists.chambana.net>
>> > Subject: [Peace-discuss] Perfidious Democrats (in Illinois, as elsewhere)
>> > From: peace-discuss at lists.chambana.net <mailto:peace-discuss at lists.chambana.net>
>> > 
>> > I've just come from a 'Joint Town Hall' rally with Illinois state senator Scott Bennett & state representative Carol Ammons. They blamed the wretched Governor Rauner for the state's budget impasse. In fact, it's entirely in the Democrats' hands. (Bennett & Ammons are both Democrats.) 
>> > 
>> > As Paul Mueth pointed out at the meeting, the Democrats have veto-proof majorities in both houses. They could pass a budget and the taxes - primarily a financial-transactions tax (HB 106) - necessary to fund it. 
>> > 
>> > Ammons replied that not all those Democrat votes can be counted on. Thus the Democrats can have it both ways - they can say that they're in favor of the spending and the taxes, but then allow enough no votes so that they won't pass.  
>> > 
>> > The same thing happened with Speaker Madigan's 'millionaires' tax.' In both cases the Democrats can tell the public they're interested in solving the problem - and then quietly show their 1% donors that they won't do it.
>> > 
>> > —CGE
>> > _______________________________________________
>> > Peace-discuss mailing list
>> > Peace-discuss at lists.chambana.net <mailto:Peace-discuss at lists.chambana.net>
>> > https://lists.chambana.net/mailman/listinfo/peace-discuss <https://lists.chambana.net/mailman/listinfo/peace-discuss>
>> 
>> _______________________________________________ Peace-discuss mailing list Peace-discuss at lists.chambana.net <mailto:Peace-discuss at lists.chambana.net>https://lists.chambana.net/mailman/listinfo/peace-discuss <https://lists.chambana.net/mailman/listinfo/peace-discuss>_______________________________________________
>> Peace-discuss mailing list
>> Peace-discuss at lists.chambana.net <mailto:Peace-discuss at lists.chambana.net>
>> https://lists.chambana.net/mailman/listinfo/peace-discuss <https://lists.chambana.net/mailman/listinfo/peace-discuss>

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.chambana.net/pipermail/peace-discuss/attachments/20150712/891f7850/attachment-0001.html>