Originally Posted by Deb C

We need a woman like Eleanor.



Eleanor Roosevelt (1884–1962)

Roosevelt was born to privilege but became one of the most visible social activists of her generation. She used her prominence as first lady to advocate for reform, giving visibility to movements for workers’ rights, women’s rights and civil rights and pushing FDR and his advisers to support progressive legislation. She held press conferences and voiced her opinions in radio broadcasts and a regular newspaper col-umn. She visited coal mines, slums and schools to draw attention to the plight of the disadvantaged and to lobby for reform laws. Her resignation from the Daughters of the American Revolution—to protest its ban on black singer Marian Anderson performing at Constitution Hall—made a controversial and powerful statement for racial justice. In 1948, as a delegate to the United Nations, she helped draft the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, which affirmed equality for all people regardless of race, creed or color.

YES! Big fan of hers. This started when I found out we apparently have the same INFJ personality type.

So....any idea where her pair is now?

Perhaps we need to ponder Eleanor's words in this period of crisis.

In a recent article by Dr. Eduard Lindeman I read his definition of democracy and it ran something like this -- democracy is the acceptance by the people of the belief that the greatest possible benefits shall be shared by all the people. In other words, our government, our basic liberties, our way of life must be constantly looking toward an ideal whereby the mass of the people shall be beneficed. Let us beware of unreasoning fear which will make us curtail these liberties and prevent a free expression of new ideas. Where the majority rules, there is little danger of moving too fast. When the power becomes concentrated in the hands of a few, there is great danger that the majority will not be able to move at all.

February 10, 1940

Originally Posted by millennialX

Does this seem like DC could potentially create the type of drama and popularity contest that you would see in a John Hughes movie. Two pretty Xer's duking it out and the crowd (media) egging it on.

Fiddling...while Rome burns? Sure...why the hell not. Oughta be quite entertaining.

Originally Posted by Roadbldr '59

Um... because, even in middle age, they still exhibit signs of "pretty-girl syndrome". You know, the idea that they can treat people any which way they choose, and the world will still adore them no matter what... simply because they are beautiful women.

That's why.

Wow. Talk about calling a spade a spade instead of a shovel.

That had actually never occurred to me, partly because I feel so unattracted to both Palin and Bachmann, even though I realize they are attractive in the abstract. In fact I would take a gender-neutral approach: being mean and stupid (or having the liberal media refer to you as such) is clearly an asset to Republican politicians nowadays. Perhaps being a pretty woman adds a chivalrous element to the base's resentment of liberal criticism? Or perhaps female beauty is the only kind of charisma the Republican Party has room nowadays? Their male candidates are not the kind of guys I'd want to lead me into battle.

Originally Posted by Brian Rush

It's worth remembering that the significant reforms of the last Crisis didn't begin until near the end of the second presidential term, which is to say near the end of FDR's first term.

Yes and no. The reforms most significant today did occur then. But does the significance of a policy 70 years make it a significant reform today? I would say the most significant things for the present that FDR did before WW II was ending the gold standard and implementing financial regulation, both of which occurred early in his first term. The corresponding agenda items for Obama would be health care reform and financial reform, one of which was accomplished, and the other was made impossible by the unfortunate timing of the 2008 panic. Had the real estate bubble peaked in 2004 on schedule, perhaps the panic would have happened two years earlier and we would be well on our way to a successful 4T. On the other hand the timing I had favored back then called for a serous slump (but not a panic) in 2010, which would probably had made things even worse.

Originally Posted by KaiserD2

Wow. Talk about calling a spade a spade instead of a shovel.

That had actually never occurred to me, partly because I feel so unattracted to both Palin and Bachmann, even though I realize they are attractive in the abstract. In fact I would take a gender-neutral approach: being mean and stupid (or having the liberal media refer to you as such) is clearly an asset to Republican politicians nowadays. Perhaps being a pretty woman adds a chivalrous element to the base's resentment of liberal criticism? Or perhaps female beauty is the only kind of charisma the Republican Party has room nowadays? Their male candidates are not the kind of guys I'd want to lead me into battle.

So how do we boost the Cynthia McKinneys?

McKinney is a raving nutcase who is a perfect example of how Boomer idiocy has driven our side off the rails and allowed the Right to steal working class voters.

This is a place for serious discussion, not juvenile culture-war ranting.

Originally Posted by Odin

McKinney is a raving nutcase who is a perfect example of how Boomer idiocy has driven our side off the rails and allowed the Right to steal working class voters.

This is a place for serious discussion, not juvenile culture-war ranting.

wtf? So you prefer a sell out like Obama? Do not get me wrong, he is better than most. But he is not the real thing.

Originally Posted by Odin

McKinney is a raving nutcase who is a perfect example of how Boomer idiocy has driven our side off the rails and allowed the Right to steal working class voters.

This is a place for serious discussion, not juvenile culture-war ranting.

So much for the progressive cause. Party unity, my ass, I guess.

Originally Posted by Odin

McKinney is a raving nutcase who is a perfect example of how Boomer idiocy has driven our side off the rails and allowed the Right to steal working class voters.

This is a place for serious discussion, not juvenile culture-war ranting.

Why is it that we call any politician who acts beyoond the current culture of so called normal corporate bought politics, is considered a nut case? I bet you a dime to a donut that many would consider Eleanor Roosevelt a nut case today's climate of boxed in policies.

We have to get past what we are told is an accepted norm of political actions. It amazes me that politicians who do try to lead a way to equality and forego corporate money are seen as crazy and discounted.

Cynthia just returned from Libya where she saw first hand what was going on there. A very brave action on her part. But politicians who take us to war and spend our money on bailing out billionaires are considered normal. Something is very very very wrong with that picture.

Originally Posted by Lady Vagina

So much for the progressive cause. Party unity, my ass, I guess.

Never let the ideal of perfection become the opening for consummate evil. The Hard Right may be cruel and reckless; it is also ruthless, well-organized and well-funded and with a clear vision of the America that it wants. Assume the worst -- a pure plutocracy with a reversion to ethical standards in business that one associates with America in the Gilded Age, with a Soviet-style system of repression to ensure that anyone who challenges it is destroyed as unceremoniously as a rabid dog.

Originally Posted by Deb C

Why is it that we call any politician who acts beyoond the current culture of so called normal corporate bought politics, is considered a nut case? I bet you a dime to a donut that many would consider Eleanor Roosevelt a nut case today's climate of boxed in policies.

We have to get past what we are told is an accepted norm of political actions. It amazes me that politicians who do try to lead a way to equality and forego corporate money are seen as crazy and discounted.

Cynthia just returned from Libya where she saw first hand what was going on there. A very brave action on her part. But politicians who take us to war and spend our money on bailing out billionaires are considered normal. Something is very very very wrong with that picture.

Oh, I'm plenty radical. It's just that she's the WRONG kind of radical, the kind prone to conspiracy theories and other things that turn people off.

Originally Posted by Odin

Oh, I'm plenty radical. It's just that she's the WRONG kind of radical, the kind prone to conspiracy theories and other things that turn people off.

I've not read anything where she supports conspiracy theories. That's not to say that she hasn't. But to my knowledge, she is an upstanding person who cares about what's going on in this country for those who live in poverty and the middle class. This seems far from what we are experiencing with too many of our main stream politicians these days.

Originally Posted by Deb C

I've not read anything where she supports conspiracy theories. That's not to say that she hasn't. But to my knowledge, she is an upstanding person who cares about what's going on in this country for those who live in poverty and the middle class. This seems far from what we are experiencing with too many of our main stream politicians these days.

Cynthia McKinney, from what I've seen, sees racism in pretty much everything and seems to talk as though everything bad that ever happens to a person of color is because of racism. (My words based on my observation of her, not her words, just to be clear.) Sometimes she's right, no doubt, but when you cry wolf too many times, you make it easier for people to tune you out -- even when there really *is* a wolf.

Originally Posted by Deb C

I've not read anything where she supports conspiracy theories. That's not to say that she hasn't. But to my knowledge, she is an upstanding person who cares about what's going on in this country for those who live in poverty and the middle class. This seems far from what we are experiencing with too many of our main stream politicians these days.

Yes indeed; that's why she got my vote. She's courageous too.

Originally Posted by Lady Vagina

I think Cynthia McKinney could be the Gray Champion of this 4T, after Obama. btw, why are Rethuglican women like Bachmann (Boomer) and Palin (Xer) so mean and stupid?

Why don't they have anyone who is decent and articulate?

I think the answer is in your question. They are Republicans.

Originally Posted by Odin

McKinney is a raving nutcase who is a perfect example of how Boomer idiocy has driven our side off the rails and allowed the Right to steal working class voters.

This is a place for serious discussion, not juvenile culture-war ranting.

I can't remember the details but Odin, showing typical restraint, pretty much stated the opinion I had built up of McKinney. I shall look them up after I get home.

Originally Posted by ziggyX65

Cynthia McKinney, from what I've seen, sees racism in pretty much everything and seems to talk as though everything bad that ever happens to a person of color is because of racism. (My words based on my observation of her, not her words, just to be clear.) Sometimes she's right, no doubt, but when you cry wolf too many times, you make it easier for people to tune you out -- even when there really *is* a wolf.

Your comment might be a bit grandious. She may address racism often, as she should, but I've not experienced her blaming it on everything.

Originally Posted by Deb C

Your comment might be a bit grandious. She may address racism often, as she should, but I've not experienced her blaming it on everything.

I suppose that a Gray Champion has to overcome people who claim to be on their side, first.

Originally Posted by KaiserD2

While I do not plan to name names here, I think it's time to call a spade a spade rather than refer to it metaphorically as a shovel, as that old Nomad Mark Twain liked to say.

For 45 years or so I have listened to Boomer lefties fantasize about the great progressive mass out there which has the strength to control America and the uniformly wicked ruling class. Now the actual voting population has moved steadily rightward, with a couple of blips, since then, but that has never bothered them. Neither has the disappearance of the industrial working class or of farmers, two New Deal constituencies. (I don't mean that these things haven't bothered them but they haven't affected their world view.) Their Prophet was indeed Howard Zinn, who reinterpreted the whole history of the US in this fashion. We this today when people claim, as they do, that the only reason the Republicans did so well in the last elections was that "progressives" like themselves stayed at home. (Whether they stayed at home or not.)

In fact, the United States moves leftward (1901-17, 1933-45, 1961-66 or so) when it has leaders who genuinely believe in greater equality, particularly economic equality, and how to bring it about. The worst indictment I can levy against my own generation is our nearly total failure to produce any of those kinds of leaders. Bill Clinton is going to live in history as the most left-wing Boomer President, and he wasn't very left wing. And I think the evidence is overwhelming that left wing Xers are not going to fill this void, because Xers have too little faith in institutions and are too busy looking out for themselves and their families to think broadly about what the country needs.

If there were a left-wing movement ready to lead us through the rest of our crisis and into a new promised land, we would know it by now. It ain't out there.

So says our brilliant and idealistic curmudgeon, Mr. Kaiser; I don't remember what so soured you on the Boomers you worked with in your profession, David. I probably being one of those lefty fantasizers you refer to, I remain perpetually hopeful for a rebirth of idealism and (unlike some of my fellow lefties) for a rebirth of wonder and spirit too. I'm a romantic, so I can't be a curmudgeon, at least not entirely; even though I get dissappointed and depressed at times over the mistakes Americans make in the voting booth, and in so many other fields. Americans are part of a young nation, historically speaking. We have a lot to learn, and once we get a bit more mature, we will be willing to learn from our elders and betters in the world. Sooner the better I say! The possibilities of a new age of the creative spirit of freedom is always there, beckoning us if we are awake to it. A few politicians like Jerry Brown have it in their breast too, as I think to a lesser extent Bill Clinton did.

Thanks to Howard Zinn, the wonderful old GI generation prophet, we have an American history as seen from the point of view of people who are seeking true freedom and justice; those who make the real history of America happen, and are its true heroes. That's so much better than reading history only from the perspective that the authorities and the heavily-invested want us to see. The real story of modern history is the Revolution, and this Revolution is ongoing and unfinished. Real history is made by the people in the streets and the meeting rooms and halls of those involved in social and cultural movements, and far less than is supposed in corporate board rooms and executive offices. Although I don't share Brian's less sanguine view of FDR (he did care some about real social justice, and if he didn't his wife was there to remind him) or his more sanguine view of Nixon (he blocked reform as often as supported it), I agree with him and others who say the main reason reforms and political or social progress happens at all, is because the people in left-wing movements pressure the politicians and companies and otherwise make things happen. Change is bottom up, and there is a vast left-wing movement in America.

I agree there is also a vast right-wing movement, and today it's larger; because Americans today are easily deceived, as I said, and often unwilling to learn from their elders and betters in the world. But sometimes they can wake up; America is the sleeping giant. The corporate interests in this country are ruthless and greedy (I would be willing to call them almost-uniformly wicked), and they have solidified their hold on power by beating back peoples' lobbies (like Ralph Nader's) with lobbies of their own, and decimating the farmers and working class, among other things. These corporate rulers are still only a tiny portion of the people, and most of us are getting poorer and poorer and at some point will be good fodder for a left Revolution that will topple them from their silver thrones. Blaming other poor people like themselves for their troubles, as they too-often do now, will begin to wear pretty thin, especially on younger folks as time goes on.

It doesn't mean we can hope for the government someday to give us everything we want; it means that we need a government of, by and for the people, and a decent and fair chance for everyone in this country. That is one important basis for a real creative America that is an ever-more fulfilling and romantic place to live; the other of course is the ongoing rebirth of inner peace and power within the spirit of the people and within each one of us. The Revolutionary projectory is still active and perpetually awaits to be aroused and liberated, as it has been here in the past (more-often than is supposed, and thanks to Mr. Zinn for reminding us of this), and (more-often in recent years) in many other countries around the world.

Originally Posted by Eric the Green

So says our brilliant and idealistic curmudgeon, Mr. Kaiser; I don't remember what so soured you on the Boomers you worked with in your profession, David. I probably being one of those lefty fantasizers you refer to, I remain perpetually hopeful for a rebirth of idealism and (unlike some of my fellow lefties) for a rebirth of wonder and spirit too. I'm a romantic, so I can't be a curmudgeon, at least not entirely; even though I get dissappointed and depressed at times over the mistakes Americans make in the voting booth, and in so many other fields. Americans are part of a young nation, historically speaking. We have a lot to learn, and once we get a bit more mature, we will be willing to learn from our elders and betters in the world. Sooner the better I say! The possibilities of a new age of the creative spirit of freedom is always there, beckoning us if we are awake to it. A few politicians like Jerry Brown have it in their breast too, as I think to a lesser extent Bill Clinton did.

Thanks to Howard Zinn, the wonderful old GI generation prophet, we have an American history as seen from the point of view of people who are seeking true freedom and justice; those who make the real history of America happen, and are its true heroes. That's so much better than reading history only from the perspective that the authorities and the heavily-invested want us to see. The real story of modern history is the Revolution, and this Revolution is ongoing and unfinished. Real history is made by the people in the streets and the meeting rooms and halls of those involved in social and cultural movements, and far less than is supposed in corporate board rooms and executive offices. Although I don't share Brian's less sanguine view of FDR (he did care some about real social justice, and if he didn't his wife was there to remind him) or his more sanguine view of Nixon (he blocked reform as often as supported it), I agree with him and others who say the main reason reforms and political or social progress happens at all, is because the people in left-wing movements pressure the politicians and companies and otherwise make things happen. Change is bottom up, and there is a vast left-wing movement in America.

I agree there is also a vast right-wing movement, and today it's larger; because Americans today are easily deceived, as I said, and often unwilling to learn from their elders and betters in the world. But sometimes they can wake up; America is the sleeping giant. The corporate interests in this country are ruthless and greedy (I would be willing to call them almost-uniformly wicked), and they have solidified their hold on power by beating back peoples' lobbies (like Ralph Nader's) with lobbies of their own, and decimating the farmers and working class, among other things. These corporate rulers are still only a tiny portion of the people, and most of us are getting poorer and poorer and at some point will be good fodder for a left Revolution that will topple them from their silver thrones. Blaming other poor people like themselves for their troubles, as they too-often do now, will begin to wear pretty thin, especially on younger folks as time goes on.

It doesn't mean we can hope for the government someday to give us everything we want; it means that we need a government of, by and for the people, and a decent and fair chance for everyone in this country. That is one important basis for a real creative America that is an ever-more fulfilling and romantic place to live; the other of course is the ongoing rebirth of inner peace and power within the spirit of the people and within each one of us. The Revolutionary projectory is still active and perpetually awaits to be aroused and liberated, as it has been here in the past (more-often than is supposed, and thanks to Mr. Zinn for reminding us of this), and (more-often in recent years) in many other countries around the world.

As I said, you get a lot of people who call themselves Dems who are really fascists at heart.

Look at all the people here who call themselves left, bate hate on a smart african american woman, and defend the inbreds.

What does kaiserd2 have against Zinn?

Originally Posted by Eric the Green

So says our brilliant and idealistic curmudgeon, Mr. Kaiser; I don't remember what so soured you on the Boomers you worked with in your profession, David. I probably being one of those lefty fantasizers you refer to, I remain perpetually hopeful for a rebirth of idealism and (unlike some of my fellow lefties) for a rebirth of wonder and spirit too. I'm a romantic, so I can't be a curmudgeon, at least not entirely; even though I get dissappointed and depressed at times over the mistakes Americans make in the voting booth, and in so many other fields. Americans are part of a young nation, historically speaking. We have a lot to learn, and once we get a bit more mature, we will be willing to learn from our elders and betters in the world. Sooner the better I say! The possibilities of a new age of the creative spirit of freedom is always there, beckoning us if we are awake to it. A few politicians like Jerry Brown have it in their breast too, as I think to a lesser extent Bill Clinton did.

Thanks to Howard Zinn, the wonderful old GI generation prophet, we have an American history as seen from the point of view of people who are seeking true freedom and justice; those who make the real history of America happen, and are its true heroes. That's so much better than reading history only from the perspective that the authorities and the heavily-invested want us to see. The real story of modern history is the Revolution, and this Revolution is ongoing and unfinished. Real history is made by the people in the streets and the meeting rooms and halls of those involved in social and cultural movements, and far less than is supposed in corporate board rooms and executive offices. Although I don't share Brian's less sanguine view of FDR (he did care some about real social justice, and if he didn't his wife was there to remind him) or his more sanguine view of Nixon (he blocked reform as often as supported it), I agree with him and others who say the main reason reforms and political or social progress happens at all, is because the people in left-wing movements pressure the politicians and companies and otherwise make things happen. Change is bottom up, and there is a vast left-wing movement in America.

I agree there is also a vast right-wing movement, and today it's larger; because Americans today are easily deceived, as I said, and often unwilling to learn from their elders and betters in the world. But sometimes they can wake up; America is the sleeping giant. The corporate interests in this country are ruthless and greedy (I would be willing to call them almost-uniformly wicked), and they have solidified their hold on power by beating back peoples' lobbies (like Ralph Nader's) with lobbies of their own, and decimating the farmers and working class, among other things. These corporate rulers are still only a tiny portion of the people, and most of us are getting poorer and poorer and at some point will be good fodder for a left Revolution that will topple them from their silver thrones. Blaming other poor people like themselves for their troubles, as they too-often do now, will begin to wear pretty thin, especially on younger folks as time goes on.

It doesn't mean we can hope for the government someday to give us everything we want; it means that we need a government of, by and for the people, and a decent and fair chance for everyone in this country. That is one important basis for a real creative America that is an ever-more fulfilling and romantic place to live; the other of course is the ongoing rebirth of inner peace and power within the spirit of the people and within each one of us. The Revolutionary projectory is still active and perpetually awaits to be aroused and liberated, as it has been here in the past (more-often than is supposed, and thanks to Mr. Zinn for reminding us of this), and (more-often in recent years) in many other countries around the world.

Thank you, Eric. Beautiful! Absolutely beautiful!

Originally Posted by Lady Vagina

As I said, you get a lot of people who call themselves Dems who are really fascists at heart.

Look at all the people here who call themselves left, bate hate on a smart african american woman, and defend the inbreds.

What does kaiserd2 have against Zinn?

Some historians are part of the solution. Others are part of the problem.

Originally Posted by Deb C

I've not read anything where she supports conspiracy theories. That's not to say that she hasn't. But to my knowledge, she is an upstanding person who cares about what's going on in this country for those who live in poverty and the middle class. This seems far from what we are experiencing with too many of our main stream politicians these days.

According to Wikipedia, she is a 9/11 Truther. That would qualify as a conspiracy theory, in my book.

Originally Posted by The Wonkette

According to Wikipedia, she is a 9/11 Truther. That would qualify as a conspiracy theory, in my book.

She is interesting to read about. I had known something of her activities before, which is why I considered her a credible alternative to the Democratic candidate. She is clearly someone who has stood up for social justice and unpopular issues with courage, and is able to take dynamic actions in congress and among the people. She is a charismatic champion of abused people in need in many places. She made mistakes, but she carried on anyway, and I felt that holding a few mistakes in temperament against someone who has stood up so well for what's right, made her an example of someone deserving of support and appreciation. I could sympathize with her plight in that regard. So I supported her candidacy in 2008. What I can tell of her support for 9-11 truth, she is not making specific charges that 9-11 was an inside job, but that investigation is warranted into the evidence that Bush may have known about the coming attacks, and that such evidence has been kept secret. It seems to me there was evidence of this much at least, though my memory is getting dim. I appreciate her willingness to try to impeach Bush and Cheney. They deserved to be in the prison house, not the White House, and the charges were correct. I agree with her opposition to Israel's actions, and her courageous actions to support Gaza (and earlier, Katrina victims), but I don't think I agree with her recent opinions on Libya. I understand why people might oppose US involvement in this though, and I say the president should have gotten approval from congress.

Looking at the planetary positions on her birthday, which I hadn't done before now, we are clearly missing out that she can't be elected; she has lots of great positions, and just one bad one (an aspect that MLK Jr. also had). But "the stars" confirm she is an impressive person, and we may not have seen the last of her. I used this method to predict the election of 2004, and I predicted before anyone else that Kerry was likely to be the nominee (and that Howard Dean would stumble), at a time when his poll numbers were tanking. I couldn't predict a victory over Bush though; the Bush's have always had a lot of cosmic "support." btw I'm not particularly motivated to look at the 2010 Republican candidates either.

A good statement here
http://youtu.be/03cOM9r51Nw

and here
http://youtu.be/cuAi3lpgsaA