Miriam,
Absolutely!
Trouble is, my line keeps shifting. But currently I cannot support
people who knowingly put personal causes or profit ahead of the
suffering by so many people. I would rather hear someone announce
that their personal gain comes first, than to have them try to
rationalize selling out those in need. Not that I would support
either one.
And yes, over my career I have made choices and compromises that I
later came to regret. So I well know the sense of frustration and the
futility of trying to justify such compromises.
Carl Jarvis
On 11/17/19, Miriam Vieni <miriamvieni@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
Carl,
As to the 2020 election, I think we need to remember that all humans are
flawed and all life involves compromise. You and I have both had to play the
game in order to survive. But each of us has decided on our personal limits.
We've each drawn a line beyond which we won't go.
Miriam.
-----Original Message-----
From: blind-democracy-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx On Behalf Of Carl Jarvis
Sent: Sunday, November 17, 2019 12:51 PM
To: blind-democracy@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: [blind-democracy] Re: Elizabeth Warren Won't Admit It, but the
Primary System Is Racist
Good Sunday morning, Miriam.
All very interesting. You've help me to ease back onto my anti nuclear
platform.
I should know better, forgetting the old adage, "How can you tell when a
politician is lying? When their lips are moving!"
I need to constantly remind myself that I am susceptible to smooth talkers.
Kenneth Jernigan comes to mind.
So I accept that I was charmed by Cory Booker's smooth talk. When I think
about how poorly we, the human race, have taken care of the pollution from
coal, oil and other fossil fuels, why would I fall under the spell that we
can now control the waste from nuclear energy?
That still leaves me sitting as a spectator in the coming 2020 presidential
election.
Carl Jarvis
On 11/16/19, Miriam Vieni <miriamvieni@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
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