Reposting a story for everyone

Don't give up hope.

https://noextrawords.wordpress.com/2015/11/24/episode-23-thankful-a-true-heart-never-come-from-anything-more-than-ashes/

No More Hillary - aka #NotWithHer aka #HashtagCentral

We've decided we're sick of dealing with Hillary as the Democratic Presidential nominee. It's enough. There are too many reasons not to vote for her, almost as many as Trump, but here are a few:

- The DNC's dealing with the Nevada caucus. Basically, shutting it down, ignoring the delegates (specifically Sanders delegates) and thereby their constituents.

- What is Hillary for? Does she have a real platform of change, or "incremental change" or "change that progressives can get done." Whatever she wants to term it. We've heard all kinds of things, but mainly, she for "against Trump."

- The obfuscation over her latest health issue. Is it serious, is it debilitating? No one knows, and everything Hillary's aides and cronies have said is, as far as we're concerned, a complete and utter lie. Basically, the boy who cried wolf, except the woman who lied President.

- Bonus - a TYT video with possibly a slight Bill Clinton slip about Hillary's health issue: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hmECSdH5IS4

- The list is too long, especially if you've been watching the Primaries

This is what we've decided: enough. Time to get the pen and paper out. We're writing the DNC, and you should, too:


YOUR ADDRESS

Democratic National Committee
Interim Chair Donna Brazile
430 South Capital St. Southeast
Washington, DC 20003

DATE

Dear Ms. Brazile,

As a lifelong Democrat, I feel it is duty to inform you I will not be voting for Hillary Clinton come this November. There are too many reasons to list, so I will not bore you with those details. Good luck in the general election,
-YOUR NAME

Short and sweet. And you'd want to address it to the new Chair of the DNC, Donna Brazile:

Democratic National Committee
Interim Chair Donna Brazile
430 South Capital St. Southeast
Washington, DC 20003

One stamp, mail out, and done.

Why do this? Anger, frustration, not being heard... any number of negative traits. But also, a hope to be heard, a hope to change the political process. Hopefully, to get a better candidate, which the DNC is capable of doing. The rich may have megaphones, but collective voices speak louder. AKA, there is a path here, and it's to get involved.

So: get out your pen and paper, and start mailing away. Share your letter on social media - Twitter, Facebook, Instagram, what have you (and block out your address, too!). Message on this post or email me or what have you. Thanks.
-Mgmt.

John Oliver has a point...

Specifically, about newspapers:

http://www.poynter.org/2016/john-oliver-the-media-is-a-food-chain-which-would-fall-apart-without-local-newspapers/425319/

To sum up: local newspapers and journalists are the ones who research the stories you click on in your Facebook / Twitter / whatever newsfeed.

We have an obligation to journalists, because they have an obligation to us. To, specifically, investigate and report on what's happening at a local, and sometimes, national level. To let us know about corruption, about local events and happenings, and how they affect us.

It's important to pay for your news. And it starts, as Mr. Oliver pointed out, at your local newspaper.

Yeah, we're broke, and we bought a half-year subscription. $100. Invest in investigators, local news, and yeah, nothing is free. That coffee you buy every day; that subscription to a dating site; those loot crates or whatever you get every month: those are fun, yes. Expensive, yes. But necessary?

Think about it. $200 a year, for the cornerstone of what keeps a local democracy clean and corruption-(almost)-free: information and reporting.

So pay those watchdogs in your state house.

Signing out,
-Mgmt.

California: Is It the End?

Simple answer: no.

Not our picture at all.

Long answer:

Why would it be? Yes, we were hoping Bernie to have taken the state popular vote. And whether you believe Clinton got the popular vote, or abused the system to get the popular vote (through voter suppression and even less savory practices), she still has the majority of votes.
And: so what?

Bernie could still get the nomination. It's a long shot (and generally predicated on Clinton getting indicted for the email scandal). Or he could run a 3rd-Party ticket. Which is still probably a good idea: as a Democratic candidate, he's forced the conversation into the issues that matter to middle- and lower-America: healthcare, corruption, college tuition, and the list goes on and on.

And that's what counts, for right now. Changing the conversation. Making Clinton, that great political pivoter, pivot to the issues that matter to the average American. Taking money out of politics. Healthcare guaranteed for all. A livable minimum wage. Will Clinton give us these things if the conversation steers that way? Of course not. But...

The winds of change are on the way. How do we know? We don't. But this past election cycle, this 32-year-old, politically jaded do-nothing has gotten up, decided to do something. A political nothing here has gotten involved, and has seen others get involved. Speak up. Join groups. Lobby for what you believe in; lobby for social justice, too. Rage against the machine, so to speak, and do one better: propose practical solutions. Simple rage isn't enough. And actions speak far louder than words.

Bernie hasn't lost; long live the revolution. Something doesn't work? Fix it. It's not easy to do so, but what other options do we have?

(As y'all know, I'm part of Wolf-PAC. Founded by The Young Turks network - the largest online news source PERIOD, this organizations is lobbying to take money out of politics. Volunteer your time - and if this isn't your thing, find out what is. And make sure you stop signing those obnoxious petitions - spend your time advocating for actual solutions and policy change.)

Put your rants / discussions / raves up in the comments here. It's been two summers of discontent on this pequeno lil' blog, but now is the time to fight. Work for change. See your state senators and reps; make politics work for you. Ask for the whole loaf, not for the crumbs. Get in it for the long haul, because it's going to be long one, indeed.

Keep in touch,
-Mgmt.

We stumbled across this movement to destroy the Super PAC

Want to get money out of politics? Don't like the Citizens United ruling? DESTROY THE SUPER PAC.
No. Seriously. The plan: 34 States = 1 Constitutional Amendment. 2 so far, VT and CA. Why even wait for the Presidential elections?
Bonus: You get to call your state Reps/Senators and bug them. Totally worth it.
www.wolf-pac.com

Volunteer, donate, call... whatever you can do. Thanks!
-Mgmt.

Politics and Memory: aka "What did I vote for last night...?"

I don't do mornings. Or afternoons, evenings, midnights... (Picture completely stolen)

Did you see the Feb 4, 2016 Democratic debate? It was last night. Really solid moderation this time, some hard hits to both sides.

And yes, Bernie was crushed on Foreign Policy. Absolutely. Clinton was very good and specific here, knows her stuff. And yet... she made those vague "politician's promises" about everything in her Domestic Policy. No policies there. Give and take.

Quick post about something we wanted to ABSOFREAKINGLUTELY HIGHLIGHT: a viewer sent a question to the moderators. It involved Hillary Clinton's speeches - ahem, her $600,000 Goldman Sachs speeches (how much do you make in a year? Just make 3 speeches you plebian). The question was brilliant: "Mrs. Clinton [to paraphrase], show us the transcripts of your Goldman Sachs speeches." These speeches were made in private to one of the six largest banks in the US.

Chuck Todd added a bit. "We know you have transcripts, and let's broaden that. Give us all your paid speeches." (Paraphrasing and emphasis ours.)

Clinton has made a point she is not bought-and-paid-for, here she is, having been offered an extraordinary fee for a speech at one of the biggest and most destructive banks this past economic meltdown. What did she say?

What did I say?

Her response, exact quote: "I will look into it. I don't know the status, but I will certainly look into it."

The link to the full debate is here. Watch it and judge for yourself! (There were a few minor glitches at the link.) That exchange between Chuck Todd and Clinton is at 45:20. Absolutely check it out.

The framing Todd gave was - you can't dodge this. These transcripts exist. What did you say to Goldman Sachs behind closed doors? Hillary's response, "I will look into it... I will certainly look into it."

This is our interpretation - Hillary's wracking her brain to remember what she said during those speeches. Did I say something voters wouldn't want to hear? What can I release about those speeches? Or perhaps she knows what she said, she remembers other promises she made, private ones behind closed doors. In either case...

Gosh... what did I vote for last night...?

And we're going to put that against a really, really minor (but funny) point that Sanders wanted to correct from Chuck Todd. At 1:28:30 at that same link.

In an earlier debate, Bernie weighed in about Clinton's email scandal. "I don't give a damn about these emails. Let's talk about issues," (paraphrased). Chuck Todd brought up an excellent point about email scandal, and asked Bernie to weigh in; Bernie challenged him on Todd saying "darned."

"Close enough," Bernie said, "I believe I had stronger wording" (paraphrase). Bernie joked that he said he didn't give a "damn," not a "darn." (1:30:55)

And quite frankly, Bernie in several instances has corrected pundits and reporters for their spin, or ignorance, on his record, his stand on issues, substantial things. This one's pretty funny, he's correcting Todd's exact wording on not giving a "damn."

But more importantly, Bernie remembers. You know what makes remembering things like that easy? Gee umm being consistent. Not lying.

Having a consistent message, supporting the same causes for God knows how many decades kind of you know, makes it easy to answer a question when someone asks you something. Or helps you correct the pundit/reporter of their spin.


It's fine that Hillary can change her mind, or "evolve" on issues. In fact, that's great. But Bernie's been right - he's been voting for these issues - all along.

And back to the transcripts: we get the sense Bernie's not going to fight a bit dirty here. He might not ask for those transcripts. Quite frankly, this is where we (the voters) come in.

Fight for those transcripts. Fight for transparency in government. I, personally, need to see what Hillary said when no one but the rich were watching. Does she have another message she's sending out? To her campaign funders? Make her remember ALL the promises she's been making.
(And call up your Representatives, your Senators to release those transcripts. Democrat, Republican, whatever, just put the pressure there. Your voted politicians ALL have websites and contact information. And trust me, they get ANNOYED when you call them up to complain, haha. Prod 'em.)



We're going to end on another important note: what policies will Hillary enact? Bernie's policies: $15/hr minimum wage, break up the six large banks, close corporate tax loopholes... etc. etc.

Take a stand, woman. You have no right to complain about someone's policies without offering your own (unless you're Republican). Now, this late in the game: what are your policies? What will you vote in?

-Mgmt

PS Please weigh in on what you read here, and our interpretation! Start that discussion! Thanks!

The Biggest Job Interview

"My name is such-and-such, and I'd love to be your President."

Consider the following post propaganda / an opinion piece. Because it is. We're pro-Bernie Sanders, that's how we side, and we entirely ignore the Republican candidates altogether. So what you're going to read, we'll get out in the open. It's only fair.

Consider the Presidential race this year to be a job interview. The Biggest Job Interview, perhaps, in the world.

We sift through resumes (Republican conservative? gone...). On the Democratic side, we've come down to two candidates: let's call them Hillary and Bernie. They would like that, like to be know by their first names. Both of them, certainly.

Hillary sits down. She's got a stunning resume, everything we want in someone for our organization. We look up, she's well-dressed, very professional, and when we throw questions her way, she answers them, makes us feel important. "We can do this, we can do that," everything's a possibility. She's, quite frankly, fantastic. We love her.


Bernie sits down. He's not bad, got a suit, tie. Resume's not bad, just doesn't jump out at us. Our questions and his answers: "We have to do this, we have to do that." He's great, he's passionate, but maybe he doesn't get us. What we want. Hillary, she got us. She knows what we want.

But before Bernie goes, we throw him a curveball. We ask him a question that's just off-the-cuff, something we've never asked candidates before. "Why do you want to join our organization?" Why do you want to be President?

What do you personally have to gain?

Bernie turns around, a bit incredulous ("Haven't you been listening to me the past hour?" - that kind of look on his face), and says "Because things are broken." And we hate hearing that, yes, but he's been honest, straightforward for our interview, and we thank him, he goes on his way.

We wish we'd asked Hillary that. We wished we could have another interview, or maybe just a coffee, chat up what's going on, casually drop that question in. But after a few days, we formulate her answer.

"So I can fight for you."

That makes us smile, she's thinking about us, but after a few days... that doesn't really answer the question. What do you personally have to gain from being our President? Why do you want this position? We wrack our brains, go over her responses - she's been very clear about fighting for us, multiple times - but that's the only thing we can imagine to be her response.

"Hillary, why do you want to be our President?"
"So I can fight for you, Matt!"

"You can be honest, Hillary. We love you. We won't judge you."
"I am being honest! I've done this all my life..." etc. etc. More talking points.

And now we need the position filled. We have only a few days left. But you can start to see it, yes? You can start to see why this position, passing Hillary in the hall, seeing Hillary at the cafeteria, for four years, why something small like that, something as small and nagging as an honest response...

We're going to have our president for four years. This is why we side with Bernie. This is our feeling of him; our feeling of Hillary, too. But really, we want YOU, the few few few readers, to educate yourselves on the candidates, their policies, (not their meaningless generalities) and go out and vote. It's so important to vote. And after you vote, follow through, find what they're doing right (and doing wrong) and keep them accountable. Vote again. Voice your concerns. Be creative; crash out on their lawn, if you feel inclined. Whether you're Republican or Democrat or vote for Trump, we don't care. Learn about the process, about the policies, and vote.

And weigh in here, too! Discuss, reason, and decide. We'd love to hear what you think, regardless of whether it's what we think, too.

-Mgmt.

Some advice for the malcontent masses

They say: You only get one vote. Not exactly true.

We've been keeping up a bit with this latest presidential cycle. The biggest thing that supporters say of one Democratic candidate over the other Democratic candidate is this:

That's great, but it's not feasible. He can't do it.

This is what we have to say, where we weigh in: you're absolutely right. He can't.

Make no mistake, voting in the most progressive and strangely "radical" candidate as Democratic Presidential nominee, or even as President of our country, will not change our national policies. It may change the conversation of our current policies, may change the tone of those conversations, but it will not change the way things work. How things have worked, for the past several election cycles.

That's great, but it's not feasible.

Yes. This is because there are checks and balances in our governmental system, intended to prevent (or at least slow) the proliferation of corruption, the power of profit over the running of an entire country. These checks and balances will almost certainly check and balance what any one politician - even The Top Politician - can accomplish.

But that's good. It keeps the total wackos in place (usually). It's why our constitution isn't modeled on, say, Dictatorship or Fascism.

We're a Democracy. And in a Democracy, there is only one solution. While there still is Democracy, anyway.

Here it is:

That's great, but it's not feasible. He can't do it alone.

Vote this cycle, vote hard, and then after? - vote often. And then speak up, explain why you voted how you did. We have the technology these days to make our (small) voices heard: social media, even if not mainstream media.

Go read up on Arab Spring. (Why are we still behind?) Perhaps American Spring is on its way.

Vote for your candidate, and then actually support him or her. We're going to be honest here, we do support Bernie Sanders. But we understand our vote is not a one-time quarter-in-the-jukebox end-all-be-all. Put your money where your mouth is. Put your vote where your mouth is. And, yes, put your time and your actions where your mouth is.

Because he can't do it alone.

-Mgmt.

A letter to Sen. Bernie Sanders - Political Transparency

Political processes at their simplest. Picture unwittingly donated by MilanaOP. Check the original at this link.

We figured Mr. Sanders is a busy, busy guy, but we had a point or two to bring up to him.

(Also, apologies to the extreme lull in our posts. We've been... catching up on politics.)

Have you ever wondered why politicians are corrupt? Actual question: why is there so much leeway for politicians to be corrupt? We think we found the answer. Read our letter to Sen. Sanders below:

"Dear Sen. Sanders,

You have touched upon voting records in your campaign for President. While I am not the most politically-minded person, I came upon perhaps a useful idea for you to implement your policies, should you win the Presidency. I would anticipate much opposition to, for instance, doing away with private insurance companies. The answer? Simple shame.

When a bill is presented, voted in or vetoed, make voting records easily accessible. Since you're speaking to a large national voter base, I would imagine your national voters would get miffed should their Senator so blatantly oppose his/her constituency. This would make Senators/House Reps/ people voted in more accountable to their constituents, yes?

Then I realized we had transparent voting systems! www.senate.gov! So much for that idea.

So I tried an experiment. I looked up a random bill to get put in - S.J. Resolution 22 (Jan 21, 2016). Here's what I came up with:

Voting record (in Senate):
http://www.senate.gov/legislative/LIS/roll_call_lists/roll_call_vote_cfm.cfm?&congress=114&session=1&vote=00297

Text of Resolution:
https://www.congress.gov/bill/114th-congress/senate-joint-resolution/22/text

(This resolution is calling for a nullification of a previously passed piece of legislation. No further information. So...)

I looked at one of the links on that page of the Resolution, to Ch. 8 of Title 5:

http://uscode.house.gov/docnotfound.xhtml
(Broken link - I think it's the authority that Congress has to override the EPA's rules.)

So I turned to Google. The original piece of legislation, 80 Fed. Reg. 37054, was attempted to be nullified, so I searched for that.

Full text:
https://www.gpo.gov/fdsys/pkg/FR-2015-06-29/pdf/2015-13435.pdf
(75 pages long)

Discernible text:
http://www.epa.gov/sites/production/files/2015-06/documents/clean_water_rule_40_cfr_230_3.pdf

See a pattern? www.senate.gov, www.congress.gov, broken link, www.gpo.gov, www.epa.gov... It's been two hours researching this Resolution - which came to a strictly partisan vote (Republicans - pro-Resolution, Dems anti-Resolution, you voted against), all over an EPA rule about defining US Waters - and ostensibly how those waters are protected by the EPA. But let me cut to the chase here: this is insane.

You talk about Super Pacs pouring money into the election process, millionaires and billionaires who are rigging elections. I think you know the "who" and the "what" of the system, but can you fix the "how?" Can you make this farce on transparency into what it should be: an open, clear system where I can see what my elected official is doing? I am a former Mensan - #100289943 - so I am no idiot, but I know deception when I see it.

Clear up voting records. Add that to your list. Let people see what their voted officials are really supporting.

And then leave it to us to clean up the rest. You just raise the issues.

As much as I would love a response, I would rather hear it on the campaign trail instead of receiving one personally, so I have not selected the "response" checkbox. Thank you for reading this.

-Matt"

Politics at work. A few more fun facts: Sen. Sanders voted against this Resolution in the Senate (Sen. Marco Rubio abstained). The President vetoed the Resolution, which, quite frankly I don't have a clue what it's really about. Back door dealings hidden behind shades in a dark room obscured in code stashed in four different places... Jesus Christ, Voldemort was not this difficult to kill.

Seriously.

We think some transparency, and yes, clarity, and perhaps organization are in order, here. It's disgusting to think of what these elected officials can do - and are doing - out in the obscured open.

-Matt