Jump to content

bludog

Senior Moderator
  • Content count

    7,241
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    16

Profile Information

  • Gender
    Male
  • Location
    Watchdog Kennel On Planet Nine

Previous Fields

  • Political Party:
    No Party/Other

Profile Fields

  • Website URL
    frogstarworld9@gmail.com

Recent Profile Visitors

14,118 profile views
  1. I was aware the gist of my post expressed acquiescence, when I wrote it. I feel the progressive cause is on hold in almost all respects until we recapture, at least one, two or more branches of government. Until then, our Democratic representatives are waging a holding action is Congress. They have done well, so far, aided by some division on the Republican side. The regional courts have played their part too. But until the coming elections, we would do better to devote all our energies to winning the electoral battles that loom ahead. Even Neo Liberal Democrats would be an improvement. They would, at least, allow for the ingress of a more progressive element. The ultimate goal would be getting money out of politics and reversing the downward spiral that is taking our Country backwards. But until we get back some political clout, much mischief will be done and damage is inevitable. Terrible and widespread. Too many Democrats get all their info from Mainstream Media where there is a uniform blackout of the most important issues we face. And that includes the so-called Liberal channels, owned by billionaires. IMO, this is because of most Democrats ignorance of the true burning issue of our time ... The Plutocratic takeover and demise of the Middle Class. If it were common knowledge, The Big Tent would have a reason to unite.
  2. The idea is a good one but I fear it would have to overcome almost insurmountable barriers. If the idea gained any traction, the above would happen almost immediately. The "Seal of Unbought" would not have to be copied closely to deny it credibility by imitation. The numerous Conservative think tanks would come up with other alternatives to confuse the matter. And, the "Seal of Unbought" would come under ferocious attack, as phony, by the Right Wing Noise Machine. If it were to succeed, Bernie would be the perfect sponsor for such a program. He has credibility on the Left and Right. He is outstanding at expressing ideas to the public. And it would give him something to do in his retirement, that's right up his alley. Bernie has already raised public awareness of the corruption of bought and sold politicians. But it hasn't been nearly enough. Any education campaign would have to be massive since, even most Democrats are only dimly aware, if that, of the widening wealth gap and the corruption that is fueling it. My own anecdotal evidence: I belong to a local Democratic Club. Most club members don't recognize corruption as a problem. Neither do they understand the threat of Plutocracy. They are mostly Middle Class and most don't recognize their numbers are shrinking. Many get all their news from CNN or MSNBC where there is a complete blackout of the increasing wealth gap, the disappearing Middle Class or the corruption driving it. Most don't read publications like The Nation, Politicus, Daily Kos, The Atlantic, et al. Most are unfamiliar with The Young Turks. I was talking with a very smart, Liberal friend today, in the dog park. But he gets all his news from CNN. I was flabbergasted he didn't know who the Koch Brothers are, or what they do. He has heard of the wealth gap but can only listen when I talk about it, because he knows so little ... Not that I'm an expert; But at least I know enough to be concerned. It would take a massive effort to educate voters on why such a seal is needed. As of now, only the Right Wing has the resources and the infrastucture to do it. Namely, the Right Wing Noise Machine. We don't have anything like it.
  3. In your opinion laripu, who is/was smarter:--- FDR or Bloomberg? IMO, FDR, like Bernie had a gift for expressing his ideas to the public. Like Bernie, he was outstanding at it. That was a large part of what made FDR so popular with the voting public. It's sometimes referred to as charisma. Another thing that allowed FDR to implement his ideas so effectively was his Brain Trust; That group of close advisers and academics, he prized for their expertise in particular fields. FDR relied on them heavily, to help shape his decisions. Another thing FDR did was to maintain extremely close contact with both houses of Congress, often attending sessions. And he was a "great communicator" with his regular speeches, interviews and fireside chats. Although no clone of FDR, by any stretch of the imagination, I believe Bernie is cut from the same mold. Bloomberg is not.
  4. I read the pertinent parts of the exchange. I tentatively think the "sophist" laripu is referring to is Mercer; but possibly worded awkwardly. I admit, it looks like the "trick" part of it was aimed at you. But for me, the meaning is somewhat unclear, until we get laripu's input.
  5. I think he's referring to Wigglie. I'm sure he's not referring to you. There's good reason to suspect Wigglie was a right wing chameleon in the LO Rm, which happens often here.
  6. Who are you quoting? And from where?. I would like to see the whole post.
  7. Putting superlatives aside, Bernie Sanders is competent enough to do one of the most important things necessary for a president:--- Choose his cabinet and advisors well and use their input to the fullest before making all but emergency decisions. And I think he would. So to me, Sanders heart being in the right place is of the utmost importance. Durable good intentions are a much rarer commodity among politicians, than exceptional intellect
  8. The linguistic problem with theism

    And if so, from where did they spring? And so on up the line.
  9. The linguistic problem with theism

    I don't normally use the pharases: God exists or God doesn't exist. Because I am neither a theist or an atheist but an agnostic. I see the question in different terms: Is there some kind of vast controlling entity(s), or not. There is no valid evidence of such. Or perhaps evolution on this limited orb did not equip us with sense organs to detect it's presence ... yet? Radio waves, ultra violet, infra red, gamma rays and other high energy particles were only recently discovered. Similarly Particle Physics is constantly discovering new subatomic particles: Electrons, Protons Neutrons, Quarks, Nuons, Fluons, and the Higgs-Boson, (the erstwhile God particle, ha ha) among others. ..... But physicists using particle accelerators are finding new ones all the time. And using arrays of optical, infra red and radio-wave telescopes we are constantly making new discoveries about the Cosmos, as it grows more complicated, the more we know. The nature of gravity is not understood. The same for dark matter and dark energy The point being that whether you look down into the world of quantum mechanics or out to the detectable limits of the known Universe, we know nearly infinitely less than is knowable. And Stephen Hawking postulates the existence of universes, without end. When a relatively complete clatogram is assembled most of the branches of the tree come to a dead end. The Earth's surviving species constitute only about 1% of all species that ever lived. Sentient intelligence and self-awareness alone, may not be enough to save we Homo Sapiens from extinction. One thing's for sure:--- There is no God who watches over us. No bibical or koranic God. From a moral standpoint, the laws of evolution are cruel and unforgiving. Evolution has depended on the early death of the many resulting in the continuance of the most adaptable. What set it all in motion, originally? Where did it come from? Maybe we are intellectually incapable of even an inkling of real comprehension. But increasingly powerful computers may help in the future.
  10. Wildlife refuges programs

    That was not activism by any stretch of he imagination.. That was US taxpayer funded regime change, where we had not moral or ethical justification to interfere in Guatemala's internal affairs.
  11. A little about me...

    Agreed. But men don't have a monopoly on foul self-aggrandizement. For instance, Wigglie shifts from "Love always" to the most exaggerated vitriol in the blink of an eye, if she can't get her way.. Even if she was not in violation of the first rule, she certainly has no hesitation to disregard the second. I hid her posts where she cited censorship and compared me to Nazis, by my name. You be the judge. Wigglie is hardly beig censored. She is free to post in NHB, The Water Cooler Chat Room, Political Books and Related Literature Forum, and Healh Insurance for All Americans. I would hardly call hat censorship. At the very least, half of Wiggly's post should be made in those sub-forums and not LO. Rules for LO × Welcome to Liberals only forum No conservatives allowed Post respectfully, personal attacks will not be tolerated No more than five new threads a day No trash talking about members and their kids No porn, or links to porn No gore pictures No cursing in thread titles No, 'outing' of members or their families; names, addresses, phone numbers, SSNs, etc. No linking to other political forums No solicitations
  12. Wildlife refuges programs

    I think we are very close to agreement that charity is no substitute for a broad, publicly funded social safety net and generous government-provided programs and services Any sensible and ethical government, and its people would first try to reason VIA diplomacy. In the complete breakdown of the diplomatic process, they might use proxy activists, in an effort to achieve the objective while trying to avoid war. If some nations ever get to that advanced level of higher moral conscience, Humankind will have ascended to the next level progressive social evolution.
  13. Wildlife refuges programs

    They are different in that charities are supposed to be intended to help the needy or disadvantaged. Activism is usually intended to hamper or end an activity or movement. In the case of the Sea Shepherd and later the Steve Irwin, and their satellite vessels, the disadvantaged were the whales. What they have in common, is making a donation to either one equals contributing to a cause. Not our government or most governments. But it's not inconceivable, at least to me.
  14. This is your last warning Wigglie. Post one more time in this room, and you will get a nice little suspension.
×