I've been having a debate about this subject with Evan Reese, ever since he was
on the blind democracy list. He reads The Economist regularly and he believes
every bit of propaganda put out by the nuclear energy industry. So, by the
way, did Joe. I remember having telephone debates with him about this. The fact
that the media don't write about the continued leakage of the Japanese nuclear
disaster into the ocean and that some of it has reached our Pacific shores,
doesn't mean that it isn't happening. Some of it reached Tokyo also, but we
don't hear about that. I've read repeatedly that our government is subsidizing
each of the nuclear plants. Well, of course, it also subsidizes the fossil fuel
companies. I wish it would subsidize me so I wouldn't have to worry about being
able to pay for good care until I die. Anyway, the other thing that really
bothers me about Booker is his support for charter schools. Obama, also.
Believe me, Obama's kids wouldn't be sent to a charter school. They attended a
quality private quaker school when they moved to DC. There are a whole bunch of
black politicians who are getting rich off the suffering of black working
people. I remember reading stuff about who actually runs the Congressional
Black Caucus that would make you sick. Identity politics is a tool and it can
be used to manipulate people just as much as anything else. That reminds me.
This powerful wealthy group that funds centrist politicians just had a meeting.
I can't remember its name because I never heard of it before. But Obama gave a
speech at their meeting.
Miriam
-----Original Message-----
From: blind-democracy-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx On Behalf Of Carl Jarvis
Sent: Saturday, November 16, 2019 5:52 PM
To: blind-democracy@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: [blind-democracy] Re: Elizabeth Warren Won't Admit It, but the Primary
System Is Racist
Interesting. I guess I did miss your post on Cory Booker. That piece on
Democracy Now was the first time I listened to Booker. He made claims that
nuclear energy has developed beyond the existing reactors, and that spent rods
can be reused. Of course I may just still be getting suckered in by a pretty
voice. I did vote for Obama in 2008, even knowing I was being sweet talked.
But you're right as far as the potential devastation that will come from
nuclear reactors if we can't control the radiation and the waste. As far as I
know, the Federal Government has not figured a safe way of cleaning up any of
the waste that is stored underground. The tanks near Hanford have leaked for
so long a time that it now threatens the Columbia River. And the Government
has no solution.
Carl
On 11/16/19, Miriam Vieni <miriamvieni@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
You didn't read my response about Corey Booker which I'm now going to
have to find an insert. Really? I've been listening to him and he horrifies
me.
He's a shill for the nuclear industry which is completely subsidized
by the government because it isn't financially self sustaining. It has
not ever built a safe nuclear plant. The age and deteriorate. New ones
will age and deteriorate. And no one has ever figured out how to
handle the nuclear waste. It never goes away. It leaks and l eaks, and
the leaks are not publicized, nor are the illnesses they cause. If
the money used to subsidize nuclear plants were invested in clean
energy science, we wouldn't need nuclear energy. If they put the kind
of financial investment and scientific effort into dealing with
climate change that they did into arming the country to fight world
war 2, we wouldn't need nuclear energy. Booker is the same guy who
promotes charter schools, a way of giving hedge fund operators public
money so they can own schools that divert students from the public
school system. He's a slick operator and a fast talker, like Obama but
probably worse.
Miriam
-----Original Message-----
From: blind-democracy-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx On Behalf Of Carl Jarvis
Sent: Saturday, November 16, 2019 1:49 PM
To: blind-democracy@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: [blind-democracy] Re: Elizabeth Warren Won't Admit It, but
the Primary System Is Racist
Did I mention that Elizabeth's reply and her tone caused me to lower
her bright and shining star a couple of notches? But also, I found
her "single payer health care" plan a bit too complicated. Most of
the efforts of politicians health plans, as well as their plans for
social reform, appear to be designed full of loopholes. I often
wonder why we are told that we need to accept a piece of legislation
that leaks like a sieve, in order to have any reform at all, and we
have to spend years carefully altering the legislation to get it where it
begins to include the folks needing the help.
But when it comes to removing social, economic, environmental,
education and health assistance, the Ruling Class can simply stamp it
out. I know that's an over statement, but it does seem to work that way.
Did I tell you that Cory Booker is looking better and better to
me...if I do get involved in the upcoming "election reality game"?
Amy Goodman played his comments from the South Carolina
discussion...or debate...or whatever .
Carl Jarvis
e
On 11/16/19, Miriam Vieni <miriamvieni@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
I posted the article to show that Amy Goodman thinks that Warren's
response is significant enough to have not only posted it separately
on the website, but written a whole article about it. And by the way,
several people on a number of left wing podcasts have mentioned,
derisively, the "debate" on her program about whether or not there
was actually a coup in Ecuador. They didn't mention Democracy Now by
name, but they mentioned hearing a debate on another program and how
ridiculous they thought it was to have a debate when the fact that
there was a coup, was obvious. Among them, were Katie Halper and Matt
Taibbi on Rolling Stone's podcast, Useful Idiots, and, of course,
Brian Becker and John Keriakou on Loud and Clear.
Miriam
-----Original Message-----
From: blind-democracy-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx On Behalf Of Carl Jarvis
Sent: Saturday, November 16, 2019 12:02 PM
To: blind-democracy@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: [blind-democracy] Re: Elizabeth Warren Won't Admit It, but
the Primary System Is Racist
While I support tweaking our election system to include a more equal
participation by voters, in the long run it will be necessary to
replace the entire System, beginning with the seizing of the
Government and of the Ruling Class. But we must warn ourselves that
in bringing down the Ruling Class, there must be a well planned
replacement. If not, the United States will look no different than
Liberia or Iraq.
Carl Jarvis
On 11/15/19, Miriam Vieni <miriamvieni@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
Here's Amy's explanation of why that question to Warren is so important.
Miriam
Elizabeth Warren Won't Admit It, but the Primary System Is Racist
Elizabeth Warren Won't Admit It, but the Primary System Is Racist
Screen shot / YouTube
As the United States becomes increasingly diverse, and the
Democratic Party even more so, the presidential nomination process
remains heavily weighted by two states that are among the whitest in
the nation, Iowa and New Hampshire. When we asked about this racial
disparity at a presidential candidate forum that the "Democracy Now!"
news hour co-hosted in South Carolina last week, Democratic
candidate Elizabeth Warren bristled, replying, "I'm just a player in the
game."
Warren and the other Democratic candidates need to answer why their
party's primary process favors these two small, rural, aging and
almost entirely white states, and they need to explain how this "game"
that weeds out candidates so early in the process is anything other
than a glaring example of systemic racism.
The forum was held at South Carolina State University, an HBCU
(historically black college or university) in Orangeburg, S.C. Here
is the question and answer, in full:
AMY GOODMAN: Senator Warren, just 30 seconds left. But speaking
about racial injustice, do you think the order of the primary states
should change? You have Iowa and New Hampshire -
SEN. ELIZABETH WARREN: Wait, let me make - let me just - before you
finish, are you actually going to ask me to sit here and criticize
Iowa and New Hampshire?
AMY GOODMAN: No, I'm asking about the order.
SEN. ELIZABETH WARREN: No, that is what Iowa and New Hampshire are
all about.
AMY GOODMAN: But let me just ask. They're two of the whitest states
in the country, and then we move to South Carolina with a very
significant population of people of color, and it means the
candidates spend so much of their time catering to those first two
states.
Overall, do you think that should change?
SEN. ELIZABETH WARREN: Look, I'm just a player in the game on this
one. And I am delighted to be in South Carolina. Thank you.
Warren's irritated reaction to the question betrays the Democratic
Party's rigid orthodoxy on first-in-the-nation status for both the
Iowa caucus and the New Hampshire primary.
In 1972, Iowa Democrats moved the caucus up to Jan. 24, to give
themselves extra time to process the results from all the precincts
(currently numbering 1,678). That early date made the Iowa caucuses
the nation's first indicator of each candidate's standing, and thus
attracted extraordinary media attention.
Sensing they were on to something, the Iowa Democratic and
Republican parties agreed to always hold their caucuses early, and
on the same day, to maximize national press coverage. New Hampshire
then managed to cement its hold as the first primary state,
immediately following the Iowa caucuses.
This has been the status quo since the 1970s, but nothing says it
has to stay that way.
MSNBC played our exchange with Warren for Democratic presidential
hopeful Julian Castro, who responded,
"I actually believe that we do need to change the order of the
states, because I don't believe that we are the same country that we
were in 1972.
.
Our country has changed a lot in those 50 years, the Democratic
Party has changed a lot. Demographically it is not reflective of the
United States as a whole, certainly not of the Democratic Party. And
I believe that other states should have their chance. So yes, of
course, we need to find other states. I don't believe that forever
we should be married to Iowa and New Hampshire going first."
There are already four majority-minority states: California, Hawaii,
New Mexico and Texas, along with the District of Columbia. Holding
caucuses or primaries in these states first would likely have a
dramatic effect on the outcome.
The lead-up to both Iowa and New Hampshire now are so long, with
candidates, in some cases, spending more than a year making
frequent, extended campaign swings through both states. Imagine if
they were spending that much time in more diverse states, like South
Carolina.
Elizabeth Warren, to her credit, did travel to Orangeburg to
participate in this first-ever presidential candidate forum on
environmental justice. The forum was co-moderated by Mustafa
Santiago Ali, former Environmental Protection Agency official, now
at the National Wildlife Federation. At the top of the forum,
Mustafa defined environmental justice:
"Environmental justice is the disproportionate impacts that continue
to happen in our communities. The things that no one else wants,
they place them in communities of color, low-income communities and
indigenous lands.
They become the sacrifice zones, the sacrifice zones for coal-fired
power plants, for certified animal feeding operations, for waste
treatment facilities, for unhealthy housing."
The concerns of the first states in the presidential nomination
process disproportionately impact the agenda for the entire race.
Democracy is about representation. The primary and caucus system
needs to be reformed now.
Amy Goodman and Denis Moynihan
Amy Goodman