Welcome to DU!
The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards.
Join the community:
Create a free account
Support DU (and get rid of ads!):
Become a Star Member
Latest Breaking News
General Discussion
The DU Lounge
All Forums
Issue Forums
Culture Forums
Alliance Forums
Region Forums
Support Forums
Help & Search
Zorra
Zorra's Journal
Zorra's Journal
August 19, 2015
Taking dirty money, by any other 'splain, is still taking dirty money.
Bundling is a great way to let corrupt politicians take money from malicious sources so that they can claim "We Didn't Know!"
No human being with any shred of integrity would ever knowingly accept bundled money from lobbyists who take money from such unspeakably wicked incarcerate for profit operations.
The only people you are going to fool with your Third Way propaganda 'splain are fools.
QUESTION (to Hillary Clinton, asked by BLM Activist): But your—you and your family have been personally and politically responsible for policies that have caused Health and Human Services disasters in impoverished communities of color (inaudible) the domestic and international War on Drugs that you championed as First Lady, Senator, and Secretary of State. And so I just want to know how you feel about your role in that violence and how you plan to reverse it?
snip---
We’re in a meeting about drugs. America’s first drug is free black labor, and turning black bodies into profit and the mass incarceration system mirrors an awful lot like the prison plantation system. It’s a similar thread, and until someone takes that message and speaks that truth to White people in this country so that we can actually take on anti-Blackness as a founding problem in this country, I don’t believe that there is going to be a solution.
Because what the conversations that are happening now and why there is so much cohesion across the divide, the red side and the blue side, it’s because of money, right, we are spending a lot of money on prisons. We’re spending more money on prisons than we are on schools, but if we look at it from lens of let’s solve this financial problem, and we don’t look at the greater bottom line that African-Americans who are Americans are suffering at greater rates than most other people, every other people, for the length of this country then it’s not going to go away. It’s just going to morph into something new and evolved. You know, I genuinely want to know, you, Hillary Clinton, have been in no uncertain way, partially responsible for this. More than most. There may have been unintended consequences.
But now that you understand the consequences, what in your heart has changed that’s going to change the direction of this country? Like what in you—not your platform, not the things you’re supposed to say—like, how do you actually feel that’s different than you did before? Like what were the mistakes, and how can those mistakes that you made be lessons for all of America for a moment of reflection on how we treat black people in this country?
snip---
We’re in a meeting about drugs. America’s first drug is free black labor, and turning black bodies into profit and the mass incarceration system mirrors an awful lot like the prison plantation system. It’s a similar thread, and until someone takes that message and speaks that truth to White people in this country so that we can actually take on anti-Blackness as a founding problem in this country, I don’t believe that there is going to be a solution.
Because what the conversations that are happening now and why there is so much cohesion across the divide, the red side and the blue side, it’s because of money, right, we are spending a lot of money on prisons. We’re spending more money on prisons than we are on schools, but if we look at it from lens of let’s solve this financial problem, and we don’t look at the greater bottom line that African-Americans who are Americans are suffering at greater rates than most other people, every other people, for the length of this country then it’s not going to go away. It’s just going to morph into something new and evolved. You know, I genuinely want to know, you, Hillary Clinton, have been in no uncertain way, partially responsible for this. More than most. There may have been unintended consequences.
But now that you understand the consequences, what in your heart has changed that’s going to change the direction of this country? Like what in you—not your platform, not the things you’re supposed to say—like, how do you actually feel that’s different than you did before? Like what were the mistakes, and how can those mistakes that you made be lessons for all of America for a moment of reflection on how we treat black people in this country?
Private Prison Lobbyists Are Raising Cash for Hillary Clinton
Last week, Clinton and other candidates revealed a number of lobbyists who are serving as “bundlers” for their campaigns. Bundlers collect contributions on behalf of a campaign, and are often rewarded with special favors, such as access to the candidate.
Richard Sullivan, of the lobbying firm Capitol Counsel, is a bundler for the Clinton campaign, bringing in $44,859 in contributions in a few short months. Sullivan is also a registered lobbyist for the Geo Group, a company that operates a number of jails, including immigrant detention centers, for profit.
As we reported yesterday, fully five Clinton bundlers work for the lobbying and law firm Akin Gump Strauss Hauer & Feld. Corrections Corporation of America, the largest private prison company in America, paid Akin Gump $240,000 in lobbying fees last year. The firm also serves as a law firm for the prison giant, representing the company in court.
Last week, Clinton and other candidates revealed a number of lobbyists who are serving as “bundlers” for their campaigns. Bundlers collect contributions on behalf of a campaign, and are often rewarded with special favors, such as access to the candidate.
Richard Sullivan, of the lobbying firm Capitol Counsel, is a bundler for the Clinton campaign, bringing in $44,859 in contributions in a few short months. Sullivan is also a registered lobbyist for the Geo Group, a company that operates a number of jails, including immigrant detention centers, for profit.
As we reported yesterday, fully five Clinton bundlers work for the lobbying and law firm Akin Gump Strauss Hauer & Feld. Corrections Corporation of America, the largest private prison company in America, paid Akin Gump $240,000 in lobbying fees last year. The firm also serves as a law firm for the prison giant, representing the company in court.
Hillary / DNC: Cut ties with private prisons!
The Clinton campaign recently engaged two sets of such bundlers from the private prison industry's lobbyists.
Private prison companies make billions from our broken and discriminatory criminal justice system by disproportionately locking up Black and brown people in the country's most dangerous prisons, for profit. Furthermore, Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) is required to keep at least 34,000 immigrants locked up to meet a draconian federal quota at a cost to taxpayers of $2 billion per year, much of this going to enrich private prison companies. And nearly 20% of immigrant detainees are locked up for traffic offenses. Imagine the devastation we'll suffer if the industry's lobbying power determines and influences the next president.
Join us in urging Secretary Clinton to disavow the private prison industry and demand that the Democratic Party oppose private prisons in their 2016 platform.
The Clinton campaign recently engaged two sets of such bundlers from the private prison industry's lobbyists.
Private prison companies make billions from our broken and discriminatory criminal justice system by disproportionately locking up Black and brown people in the country's most dangerous prisons, for profit. Furthermore, Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) is required to keep at least 34,000 immigrants locked up to meet a draconian federal quota at a cost to taxpayers of $2 billion per year, much of this going to enrich private prison companies. And nearly 20% of immigrant detainees are locked up for traffic offenses. Imagine the devastation we'll suffer if the industry's lobbying power determines and influences the next president.
Join us in urging Secretary Clinton to disavow the private prison industry and demand that the Democratic Party oppose private prisons in their 2016 platform.
August 15, 2015
Gaining awareness of the historical and present differences in values, consciousness, and worldview between Euro-christian and other cultures long removed from tribal roots and personal physical and spiritual interaction with the natural world, and manifesting constructive action based on this awareness will help not only NA's, but all the peoples of the world and the planet herself. The understanding that the earth is sacred to Native Americans is primary, and witnessing the ongoing attempted sociopathic destruction of the earth by gold obsessed materialistic cultures is literally heartbreaking and soul crushing.
"Your people are driven by a terrible sense of deficiency. When the last tree is cut, the last fish is caught, and the last river is polluted; when to breathe the air is sickening, you will realize, too late, that wealth is not in bank accounts and that you can’t eat money." ~ Alanis Obamasawin
Some suggestions ~
NARF may be able to provide the most informed answers to your question "How Can We Help?"
NARF
http://www.narf.org/about-us/
Navajo Nation Mourning, Pleading for Help After Toxic Mine Spill Contaminates Rivers
Though EPA administrator Gina McCarthy said at a news conference today that the agency's slow response was out of caution, Navajo Nation President Russell Begaye said the slow response is frustrating the Navajo people, who are "weeping every day" and in "dire need of clean water," not only for drinking, but also to sustain their organic farms and ranches.
"Our soul is hurting," Begaye told ABC News today. "I meet people daily that weep when they see me, asking me, 'How do I know the water will be safe?' The Animas River and the San Juan rivers are our lifelines. Water is sacred to us. The spirit of our people is being impacted."
http://abcnews.go.com/US/navajo-nation-mourning-pleading-toxic-mine-spill-contaminates/story?id=33011914
Though EPA administrator Gina McCarthy said at a news conference today that the agency's slow response was out of caution, Navajo Nation President Russell Begaye said the slow response is frustrating the Navajo people, who are "weeping every day" and in "dire need of clean water," not only for drinking, but also to sustain their organic farms and ranches.
"Our soul is hurting," Begaye told ABC News today. "I meet people daily that weep when they see me, asking me, 'How do I know the water will be safe?' The Animas River and the San Juan rivers are our lifelines. Water is sacred to us. The spirit of our people is being impacted."
http://abcnews.go.com/US/navajo-nation-mourning-pleading-toxic-mine-spill-contaminates/story?id=33011914
Gaining awareness of the historical and present differences in values, consciousness, and worldview between Euro-christian and other cultures long removed from tribal roots and personal physical and spiritual interaction with the natural world, and manifesting constructive action based on this awareness will help not only NA's, but all the peoples of the world and the planet herself. The understanding that the earth is sacred to Native Americans is primary, and witnessing the ongoing attempted sociopathic destruction of the earth by gold obsessed materialistic cultures is literally heartbreaking and soul crushing.
"Your people are driven by a terrible sense of deficiency. When the last tree is cut, the last fish is caught, and the last river is polluted; when to breathe the air is sickening, you will realize, too late, that wealth is not in bank accounts and that you can’t eat money." ~ Alanis Obamasawin
A Basic Call to Consciousness
The Hau de no sau nee Address to the Western World
Geneva, Switzerland, Autumn 1977
snip---
The papers which follow are position papers which were presented by the Hau de no sau nee to the Non-governmental Organizations of the United Nations in Geneva, Switzerland in September, 1977. The Non-governmental Organizations had called for papers which describe the conditions of oppression suffered by Native people under three subject headings, with supportive oral statements to be given to the commissions. The Hau de no sau nee, the traditional Six nations council at Onondaga, sent forth three papers which constitute an abbreviated analysis of Western history, and which call for a consciousness of the Sacred Web of Life in the Universe.
It is a call which can be expected to be both ignored and misunderstood for some period of time. But the position papers themselves are absolutely unique -- they constitute a political statement, presented to a representative world body, pointing to the destruction of the Natural World and the Natural World peoples as the clearest indicator that human beings are in trouble on this planet. It is a call to a basic consciousness which has ancient roots and ultra-modern, even futuristic, manifestations.
It is a statement which points to the fact that humans are abusing one another, that they are abusing the planet they live on, that they are even abusing themselves. It is a message, certainly the first ever delivered to a world body, which identifies the process of that abuse as Western Civilization -- as a whole way of life -- and which acknowledges the immense complexity which that statement implies.
What is presented here is nothing less audacious than a cosmogony of the Industrialized World presented by the most politically powerful and independent non-Western political body surviving in North America. It is, in a way, the modern world through Pleistocene eyes.
http://www.ratical.org/many_worlds/6Nations/6nations1.html
The Hau de no sau nee Address to the Western World
Geneva, Switzerland, Autumn 1977
snip---
The papers which follow are position papers which were presented by the Hau de no sau nee to the Non-governmental Organizations of the United Nations in Geneva, Switzerland in September, 1977. The Non-governmental Organizations had called for papers which describe the conditions of oppression suffered by Native people under three subject headings, with supportive oral statements to be given to the commissions. The Hau de no sau nee, the traditional Six nations council at Onondaga, sent forth three papers which constitute an abbreviated analysis of Western history, and which call for a consciousness of the Sacred Web of Life in the Universe.
It is a call which can be expected to be both ignored and misunderstood for some period of time. But the position papers themselves are absolutely unique -- they constitute a political statement, presented to a representative world body, pointing to the destruction of the Natural World and the Natural World peoples as the clearest indicator that human beings are in trouble on this planet. It is a call to a basic consciousness which has ancient roots and ultra-modern, even futuristic, manifestations.
It is a statement which points to the fact that humans are abusing one another, that they are abusing the planet they live on, that they are even abusing themselves. It is a message, certainly the first ever delivered to a world body, which identifies the process of that abuse as Western Civilization -- as a whole way of life -- and which acknowledges the immense complexity which that statement implies.
What is presented here is nothing less audacious than a cosmogony of the Industrialized World presented by the most politically powerful and independent non-Western political body surviving in North America. It is, in a way, the modern world through Pleistocene eyes.
http://www.ratical.org/many_worlds/6Nations/6nations1.html
August 12, 2015
May 28th: So what's up with the (I'm guessing Clinton operatives) out here calling Bernie Sanders
racist?
StopTheTPP (64 posts)
This discussion thread was locked as off-topic by Sissyk (a host of the General Discussion forum).
There's a million threads on it and Google search came up empty.
Where did this come from?
And I'll just say this. I'm voting for Bernie Sanders in the primary. Obviously Hillary Clinton will want our support in the general if she defeats Bernie Sanders in the primary. This is not the way to go about it.
http://www.democraticunderground.com/10026742224
This discussion thread was locked as off-topic by Sissyk (a host of the General Discussion forum).
There's a million threads on it and Google search came up empty.
Where did this come from?
And I'll just say this. I'm voting for Bernie Sanders in the primary. Obviously Hillary Clinton will want our support in the general if she defeats Bernie Sanders in the primary. This is not the way to go about it.
http://www.democraticunderground.com/10026742224
August 12, 2015
The BS narratives were being heavily marketed/promoted by Clinton supporters
here for almost two months before the NN event.
Clinton supporters, close to 100% exclusively Clinton supporters, began pushing it here at DU on May 27th.
On the same day, May 27th, RW hacks began promoting the meme also.
There are a whole lot of BS OP's and swarm threads full of toxic filth on this subject that can be easily researched using the DU search function.
Vile.
August 11, 2015
Some things just can't be justified, no matter how much 'splainin gets done.
And there's a whole lot of 'splainin, and no justifying, getting done here.
Sorry. Actions have consequences. The Seattle incident does not reflect well on BLM at all. I hope someone with some semblance of wisdom from BLM has "the talk" with this young, inexperienced woman, before she successfully frightens every blue haired granny from Petaluma to Peoria down to Pensacola into voting for Donald Trump, and fucking up the lives of every non-white, and/or female, and/or LGBT, and/or every decent person in America who sincerely wants justice and equality for everyone.
Angry, aggressive extremists shouting blanket ethnic and/or racial slurs in front of a microphone. Not cool, especially in the minds of people who know history.
Bernie Sanders is a very gracious, thoughtful, and understanding human being, who clearly knows how to take a bad situation, turn it around, and bring it to positive resolution for everyone.
It would be good for everyone if we could put this behind us, work for positive resolution, and hope a similar situation does not manifest in the future.
I sincerely hope that Black Lives Matter achieves whatever righteous goals it pursues.
August 9, 2015
So don't tell me to just STFU and get in line.
Show me authentic, show me real, and then tell me the plan. I need this, because I have been subjected to smoke, lies, deception, and abuse by the wealthy private interests that own hostile forces which are hostile to democracy and justice within the Democratic party for several decades. These hostile forces use vague shit to tell lies and use these lies to deceive gullible people into acting against their own interests.
http://www.democraticunderground.com/1251495072
It is difficult to help someone when they consistently act against their own interests, repeating
the same unproductive behavior over and over, and expecting a different result.
We progressive Bernie supporters, of all races, genders, and sexual orientations, believe that one thing we can do to help prevent African Americans from being abused and murdered by psycho cops, and improve their social and economic conditions, is to get Bernie elected to the Presidency.
We can unite and do our best to nominate and elect a sincere, concerned President who actually gets that black lives matter, and who actually cares about the systemic racism and economic and social injustice that have been inflicted upon African Americans and other, and who will actually make every effort to do something about it.
Non African Americans cannot presume to lead African American movements for justice and equality. Even if we are of another minority, we haven't lived the black experience. African Americans can lead, and the rest of us can follow, as long as they explicitly tell us what they would like us to do. If African Americans do not explicitly tell us what they would like us to do to help, and we have no intrinsic knowledge basis for leadership in AA movements, we are all left here wanting to help. but not knowing how to help.
You mentioned that these two young leaders of BLM in Seattle were "passionate, inexperienced young firebrands". Passionate, inexperienced young firebrands do not make good leaders. The have tendency to walk off of cliffs, not watching where they are going while looking up at the sky, taking those who follow them off the cliff with them.
As an activist, I recognize and respect the effectiveness of disrupting political rallies to get a point across. However, when doing so, it is important to make it perfectly clear that you do not have nefarious partisan political ulterior motives when making your case. BLM leaders at NN made a serious mistake by disrupting an event that did not include Hillary Clinton. They irreparably damaged the credibility of their movement by making it appear that their action could have been one of political partisanship rather than purely to make the case that we all need to be aware of the desperate conditions that exist, and take action to solve them.
Like it or not, assuming the motives of BLM's leadership are singular and sincere, the leadership of BLM has very seriously fucked up by tainting the general public's view of their credibility, and have left themselves wide open to accusations of maliciously using a very important and righteous cause to attempt to damage Bernie Sander's reputation and campaign, and shill for Hillary Clinton, in an effort to help Clinton win the nomination.
The leadership of BLM has made a very serious error, and continues to err by only disrupting the events of one candidate, while at the same time basically ignoring past racist words and actions of Hillary Clinton while aimlessly flailing away at a candidate who clearly has, at the very least, sincerely attempted to support justice and equality for African Americans for several decades.
And no matter what they do from here on out, BLM will never be able get this toothpaste back in the tube. They have made the motivation for their activism legitimately suspect, and continue to do so.
Wise leadership would do damage control starting right now, and help restore BLM credibility, and could help this movement become a focused, effective, constructive force for significant positive change. But there does not appear to be another MLK on the horizon right now, and I doubt BLM would pay attention to direction from a long experienced activist leader like Rev. Jesse Jackson, Jr.
So we're all waiting, and listening, and waiting, for BLM to tell us what they'd like the rest of the world to do to help them, as many have been wondering what the plan is.
Telling us we need to vote for Hillary Clinton would be the exact wrong answer. That is the same path that has led directly off the cliff for everyone but the very wealthy, for decades. The same path that has put many African Americans in the desperate straits they are in at this time.
Voting for Hillary Clinton would continue the process of repeating the same unproductive behavior over and over, while expecting a different result.
Real progressives, of all colors, gender, and sexual orientation, didn't fall off he turnip truck yesterday. Wealthy private interests have all the money, power, and talent in the world to promote agendas and actions that serve their interests, and they do it with malicious, anti-democratic intent, every single day, early, and often, without conscience.
BLM indisputably has a righteous and legitimate cause. If they wish to restore their credibility, they would be wise to make it clear that their only purpose is to advocate and gain justice and equality for African Americans. Because it is definitely not clear to large numbers of people that this is their only agenda.
Where's the #BlackLivesMatter Critique of the Black Misleadership Class, or Obama or Hillary?
08/06/2015
snip---
Some better questions are whether #BlackLivesMatter is really anything like a peoples movement aimed at changing society and lives for the better, or is it the private vehicle of its co-creators who get to take it where they decide to go? To whom are #BlackLivesMatter's leaders accountable, and just where are they taking their “movement”? Barack Obama's 2008 campaign marketed itself as “the movement” too.
Why doesn't the #BlackLivesMatter movement, supposedly focused upon the unique needs of people of color, have any critique of the black political class, almost all Democrats, who have been key stakeholders in the building of the prison state, in gentrification and school privatization from New Orleans to Detroit and beyond, and who helped peddle the subprime mortgages to black families which exploded and cut black family wealth by nine-tenths? Have they even noticed that a black president has closed and privatized more public schools than any other in US history? For all the big words they use, do they ever mention the word “capitalism”?
There are ominous signs. Last month folks whom Alicia Garza described as “part of our team” disrupted two minor white male candidates at NetRootsNation, the annual networking event for paid and wannabe paid Democratic party activists, embarrassing them with demands over structural racism and “say her name”. If they were positioning themselves for careers inside the far-flung Democratic party apparatus, it was a smart move, because Hillary wasn't there. Hence they got noticed in that crowd of Democrat operatives without antagonizing the people with the real money and connections.
snip---
It's appropriate to wonder what a “movement” really is these days. Maybe movements nowadays are really brands, to be evoked and stoked by marketers and creators when needed. But it's hard to imagine a brand transferring the power from the wealthy to the poor. It's hard to imagine a brand being accountable to its membership, even if you could be a member of a brand. And it's impossible for a brand to prefigure, to get us ready to imagine and become the kind of people we'll need to be to build the new world after capitalism.
http://www.blackagendareport.com/wheres-the-blacklivesmatter-critique-of-black-political-class
08/06/2015
snip---
Some better questions are whether #BlackLivesMatter is really anything like a peoples movement aimed at changing society and lives for the better, or is it the private vehicle of its co-creators who get to take it where they decide to go? To whom are #BlackLivesMatter's leaders accountable, and just where are they taking their “movement”? Barack Obama's 2008 campaign marketed itself as “the movement” too.
Why doesn't the #BlackLivesMatter movement, supposedly focused upon the unique needs of people of color, have any critique of the black political class, almost all Democrats, who have been key stakeholders in the building of the prison state, in gentrification and school privatization from New Orleans to Detroit and beyond, and who helped peddle the subprime mortgages to black families which exploded and cut black family wealth by nine-tenths? Have they even noticed that a black president has closed and privatized more public schools than any other in US history? For all the big words they use, do they ever mention the word “capitalism”?
There are ominous signs. Last month folks whom Alicia Garza described as “part of our team” disrupted two minor white male candidates at NetRootsNation, the annual networking event for paid and wannabe paid Democratic party activists, embarrassing them with demands over structural racism and “say her name”. If they were positioning themselves for careers inside the far-flung Democratic party apparatus, it was a smart move, because Hillary wasn't there. Hence they got noticed in that crowd of Democrat operatives without antagonizing the people with the real money and connections.
snip---
It's appropriate to wonder what a “movement” really is these days. Maybe movements nowadays are really brands, to be evoked and stoked by marketers and creators when needed. But it's hard to imagine a brand transferring the power from the wealthy to the poor. It's hard to imagine a brand being accountable to its membership, even if you could be a member of a brand. And it's impossible for a brand to prefigure, to get us ready to imagine and become the kind of people we'll need to be to build the new world after capitalism.
http://www.blackagendareport.com/wheres-the-blacklivesmatter-critique-of-black-political-class
So don't tell me to just STFU and get in line.
Show me authentic, show me real, and then tell me the plan. I need this, because I have been subjected to smoke, lies, deception, and abuse by the wealthy private interests that own hostile forces which are hostile to democracy and justice within the Democratic party for several decades. These hostile forces use vague shit to tell lies and use these lies to deceive gullible people into acting against their own interests.
http://www.democraticunderground.com/1251495072
August 7, 2015
If Governor O'Malley publicly disavows his signing and support for the Hyde Park Declaration, and publicly disavows DLC/Third Way/New Democrat Centrism, I'll take him seriously. Otherwise, meh. It's just talk. His record as governor is
Long experience shows that DLC/ThirdWay/New Democrat Centrists will do or say anything to get elected, and then, when elected, make little or no attempt to actually do what they said they were going to do when campaigning.
Third Way/DLC/New Democrat Centrists have all but destroyed the Democratic party. Because of DLC/ThirdWay/New Democrat Centrists, in a few short years we went from having huge majorities in both Houses, and in the White House, to getting slaughtered in elections by Republicans, who now have huge majorities in both Houses ans a good shot at putting another one of their puppet clowns in the WH.
We have rampant economic inequality, and Americans have had to take to the streets several times because police are allowed to kill and incarcerate them with impunity. Banksters who destroyed the economy have not been prosecuted, and our President is fervently promoting a Trade Deal that will guarantee serfdom for American workers. Labor is in the worst shape since the New Deal, and wages are stagnant. Privatization is increasing year by year.
Why? Because Americans continue to elect DLC/Third Way/New Democrat politicians who make little or no attempt to solve the problems that need to be addressed because when all is said and done, their loyalty lies with corporations and oligarchs, and the 99% gets lip service and trickle on economic spew down our backs while being told it's only rain, nothing to worry about. Business worshiping centrist Democrats, along with republicans, have allowed wealthy private interests to exploit workers and fuck up our country and planet just about beyond repair.
So when Governor O'Malley disavows publicly disavows DLC/ThirdWay/NewDemocrat centirsm, I'll start believing he actually might be real.
Read:
Blahblahblah. I don't care. A rose by any other name still smells like a rose.
Martin O'Malley Worked With Lobbyists to Recruit Pro-Business Democrats
Aug. 5 2015, 11:26 a.m.
As he campaigns for the presidency this year, Martin O’Malley has cast himself as a populist “public enemy” of Wall Street and a champion of the working class against America’s moneyed elite.
But only a year ago, O’Malley was working with corporate lobbyists to recruit business-friendly politicians into the Democratic Party.
In 2011, O’Malley co-founded a group called The NewDEAL, a nonprofit described as an effort to highlight the work of “pro-business progressives.” Rather than championing anti-bank populists, the group worked to promote moderate Colorado Gov. John Hickenlooper and former Miami Mayor Manny Diaz, now an attorney who counts Walmart as a client.
snip---
Gonzalez’s lobbying firm, Peck Madigan Jones, represents the very Wall Street interests O’Malley now decries. The firm recently lobbied on behalf of a trade group that represents Goldman Sachs and J.P. Morgan Chase, among other banks, on efforts to slow down Dodd-Frank reforms through cost-benefit analysis reports.
https://firstlook.org/theintercept/2015/08/05/martin-omalley-just-prior-populist-presidential-bid-steered-democrats-pro-business/
Aug. 5 2015, 11:26 a.m.
As he campaigns for the presidency this year, Martin O’Malley has cast himself as a populist “public enemy” of Wall Street and a champion of the working class against America’s moneyed elite.
But only a year ago, O’Malley was working with corporate lobbyists to recruit business-friendly politicians into the Democratic Party.
In 2011, O’Malley co-founded a group called The NewDEAL, a nonprofit described as an effort to highlight the work of “pro-business progressives.” Rather than championing anti-bank populists, the group worked to promote moderate Colorado Gov. John Hickenlooper and former Miami Mayor Manny Diaz, now an attorney who counts Walmart as a client.
snip---
Gonzalez’s lobbying firm, Peck Madigan Jones, represents the very Wall Street interests O’Malley now decries. The firm recently lobbied on behalf of a trade group that represents Goldman Sachs and J.P. Morgan Chase, among other banks, on efforts to slow down Dodd-Frank reforms through cost-benefit analysis reports.
https://firstlook.org/theintercept/2015/08/05/martin-omalley-just-prior-populist-presidential-bid-steered-democrats-pro-business/
If Governor O'Malley publicly disavows his signing and support for the Hyde Park Declaration, and publicly disavows DLC/Third Way/New Democrat Centrism, I'll take him seriously. Otherwise, meh. It's just talk. His record as governor is
Long experience shows that DLC/ThirdWay/New Democrat Centrists will do or say anything to get elected, and then, when elected, make little or no attempt to actually do what they said they were going to do when campaigning.
Third Way/DLC/New Democrat Centrists have all but destroyed the Democratic party. Because of DLC/ThirdWay/New Democrat Centrists, in a few short years we went from having huge majorities in both Houses, and in the White House, to getting slaughtered in elections by Republicans, who now have huge majorities in both Houses ans a good shot at putting another one of their puppet clowns in the WH.
We have rampant economic inequality, and Americans have had to take to the streets several times because police are allowed to kill and incarcerate them with impunity. Banksters who destroyed the economy have not been prosecuted, and our President is fervently promoting a Trade Deal that will guarantee serfdom for American workers. Labor is in the worst shape since the New Deal, and wages are stagnant. Privatization is increasing year by year.
Why? Because Americans continue to elect DLC/Third Way/New Democrat politicians who make little or no attempt to solve the problems that need to be addressed because when all is said and done, their loyalty lies with corporations and oligarchs, and the 99% gets lip service and trickle on economic spew down our backs while being told it's only rain, nothing to worry about. Business worshiping centrist Democrats, along with republicans, have allowed wealthy private interests to exploit workers and fuck up our country and planet just about beyond repair.
So when Governor O'Malley disavows publicly disavows DLC/ThirdWay/NewDemocrat centirsm, I'll start believing he actually might be real.
Read:
This page contains excerpts from government reports, signed by elected officials.
http://www.issues2000.org/Notebook/Note_00-DLC0.htm
00-DLC0 on Aug 1, 2000
Report: the manifesto, "A New Politics for a New America":
Source: The Hyde Park Declaration
As New Democrats, we believe in a Third Way that rejects the old left-right debate and affirms America’s basic bargain: opportunity for all, responsibility from all, and community of all.
We believe:
that government’s proper role in the New Economy is to equip working Americans with new tools for economic success and security.
in expanding trade and investment because we must be a party of economic progress, not economic reaction.
that fiscal discipline is fundamental to sustained economic growth as well as responsible government.
that a progressive tax system is the only fair way to pay for government.
the Democratic Party’s mission is to expand opportunity, not government.
that education must be America’s great equalizer, and we will not abandon our public schools or tolerate their failure.
that all Americans must have access to health insurance.
in preventing crime and punishing criminals.
in a new social compact that requires and rewards work in exchange for public assistance and that ensures that no family with a full-time worker will live in poverty.
that public policies should reinforce marriage, promote family, demand parental responsibility, and discourage out-of-wedlock births.
in enhancing the role that civic entrepreneurs, voluntary groups, and religious institutions play in tackling America’s social ills.
in strengthening environmental protection by giving communities the flexibility to tackle new challenges that cannot be solved with top-down mandates.
government must combat discrimination on the basis of race, creed, gender, or sexual orientation; defend civil liberties; and stay out of our private lives.
that abortion should be safe, legal, and rare.
in progressive internationalism -- the bold exercise of US leadership to foster peace, prosperity, and democracy.
that the US must maintain a strong, technologically superior defense to protect our interests and values.
Democrats participating in 00-DLC0
Brian Baird s1a Washington Democrat (until 2010)
Max Baucus s1a MT Democratic Sr Senator (retiring 2014)
Evan Bayh s1s IN Former Democratic Senator
Shelley Berkley s1a Nevada Democrat (Senate run 2012)
John Breaux s1s LA Former Democratic incumbent; retired 2004
Maria Cantwell s1a WA Democratic Jr Senator
Lois Capps s1a California Democrat
Russ Carnahan s1a Missouri Democrat
Tom Carper s1a DE Democratic Sr Senator
Ed Case s1a Hawaii Democrat
Ben Chandler s1a Kentucky Democrat
Bill Clinton s1a POTUS Democrat
Hillary Clinton s1a NY Former Democratic Senator (NY); now Secretary of State
Kent Conrad s1a ND Democrat Sr Senator (Retiring)
Bud Cramer s1a Alabama Democrat (Retired 2008)
Joseph Crowley s1a New York Democrat
Artur Davis s1a Alabama Former Democrat (until 2010)
Jim Davis s1s Florida Democrat
Susan Davis s1a California Democrat
Cal Dooley s1s California Democrat (Until 2004)
Byron Dorgan s1a ND Democratic Jr Senator (retiring 2010)
John Edwards s1a NC Former Democrat Senator; retired to run for President, 2004
Rahm Emanuel s1a Illinois Former Democrat (until 2009)
Eliot Engel s1a New York Democrat/Liberal
Bob Etheridge s1a North Carolina Democrat (Unseated 2010)
Dianne Feinstein s1a CA Democratic Sr Senator
Dick Gephardt s1a Missouri Democrat (Until 2004)
Al Gore s1a POTUS Democrat
Bob Graham s1a FL Former Democratic Senator; retired 2004
Jane Harman s1a California Democrat (Resigned 2011)
Brian Higgins s1a New York Democrat
Rush Holt s1a New Jersey Democrat
Darlene Hooley s1a Oregon Democrat (Retiring 2008)
Jay Inslee s1a WA Democratic Governor
Steve Israel s1a New York Democrat
Tim Johnson s1a SD Democratic Sr Senator (retiring 2014)
Bob Kerrey s1a NE Democratic Challenger (previously Senator)
John Kerry s1s MA Democratic Sr Senator
Ron Kind s1a WI Former Democratic challenger (2012)
Herbert Kohl s1a WI Democratic Sr Senator (Retiring)
Mary Landrieu s1s LA Democratic Sr Senator
Rick Larsen s1a Washington Democrat
John Larson s1a Connecticut Democrat
Blanche Lambert Lincoln s1s AR Former Democratic Senator
Zoe Lofgren s1a California Democrat
Terry McAuliffe s1a VA Democratic Challenger
Carolyn McCarthy s1a New York Dem./Ind./Working-Families
Mike McIntyre s1a North Carolina Democrat
Gregory Meeks s1a New York Dem./Working-Families
Juanita Millender-McDonald s1a California Democrat
Dennis Moore s1a Kansas Democrat (until 2010)
James Moran s1s Virginia Democrat
Ben Nelson s1a NE Democratic Sr Senator (Retiring)
Bill Nelson s1a FL Democratic Sr Senator
Sam Nunn s1a GA Democratic Senator (Former)
Martin O`Malley s1a MD Democratic Governor
David Eugene Price s1a North Carolina Democrat
Mark Pryor s1a AR Democratic Sr Senator
Charles Robb s1s VA Democratic Senator (Former)
Tim Roemer s1s Indiana Democrat
Loretta Sanchez s1a California Democrat
Adam Schiff s1a California Democrat
Allyson Schwartz s1a Pennsylvania Democratic Governor Challenger
David Scott s1a Georgia Democrat
Kathleen Sebelius s1a KS Former Democratic Governor (1994-2002); Cabinet Sec'y (HHS)
David Adam Smith s1a Washington Democrat
Debbie Stabenow s1a MI Democratic Jr Senator
John Tanner s1a Tennessee Democrat (until 2010)
Ellen Tauscher s1s California Former Democrat (until 2009)
Tom Udall s1a New Mexico Democrat (Senate 2008)
Tom Vilsack s1s IA Former Democratic Governor (1994-2002); Cabinet Sec'y (USDA)
David Wu s1a Oregon Democrat (Resigned 2011)
Independents participating in 00-DLC0
Harold Ford s1a NY 2010 Democratic Primary Challenger; previously US Rep (TN)
Joseph Lieberman s1s CT Independent Sr Senator; Gore's VP nominee (Retiring)
Janet Napolitano s1a US Cabinet
Gavin Newsom s1a 0CA00 S.F. Mayor; former Gov. candidate (2000)
Mike Thurmond s1a GA 2010 Democratic Challenger
Anthony Williams s1a DC00 Washington Mayor
http://www.issues2000.org/Notebook/Note_00-DLC0.htm
00-DLC0 on Aug 1, 2000
Report: the manifesto, "A New Politics for a New America":
Source: The Hyde Park Declaration
As New Democrats, we believe in a Third Way that rejects the old left-right debate and affirms America’s basic bargain: opportunity for all, responsibility from all, and community of all.
We believe:
that government’s proper role in the New Economy is to equip working Americans with new tools for economic success and security.
in expanding trade and investment because we must be a party of economic progress, not economic reaction.
that fiscal discipline is fundamental to sustained economic growth as well as responsible government.
that a progressive tax system is the only fair way to pay for government.
the Democratic Party’s mission is to expand opportunity, not government.
that education must be America’s great equalizer, and we will not abandon our public schools or tolerate their failure.
that all Americans must have access to health insurance.
in preventing crime and punishing criminals.
in a new social compact that requires and rewards work in exchange for public assistance and that ensures that no family with a full-time worker will live in poverty.
that public policies should reinforce marriage, promote family, demand parental responsibility, and discourage out-of-wedlock births.
in enhancing the role that civic entrepreneurs, voluntary groups, and religious institutions play in tackling America’s social ills.
in strengthening environmental protection by giving communities the flexibility to tackle new challenges that cannot be solved with top-down mandates.
government must combat discrimination on the basis of race, creed, gender, or sexual orientation; defend civil liberties; and stay out of our private lives.
that abortion should be safe, legal, and rare.
in progressive internationalism -- the bold exercise of US leadership to foster peace, prosperity, and democracy.
that the US must maintain a strong, technologically superior defense to protect our interests and values.
Democrats participating in 00-DLC0
Brian Baird s1a Washington Democrat (until 2010)
Max Baucus s1a MT Democratic Sr Senator (retiring 2014)
Evan Bayh s1s IN Former Democratic Senator
Shelley Berkley s1a Nevada Democrat (Senate run 2012)
John Breaux s1s LA Former Democratic incumbent; retired 2004
Maria Cantwell s1a WA Democratic Jr Senator
Lois Capps s1a California Democrat
Russ Carnahan s1a Missouri Democrat
Tom Carper s1a DE Democratic Sr Senator
Ed Case s1a Hawaii Democrat
Ben Chandler s1a Kentucky Democrat
Bill Clinton s1a POTUS Democrat
Hillary Clinton s1a NY Former Democratic Senator (NY); now Secretary of State
Kent Conrad s1a ND Democrat Sr Senator (Retiring)
Bud Cramer s1a Alabama Democrat (Retired 2008)
Joseph Crowley s1a New York Democrat
Artur Davis s1a Alabama Former Democrat (until 2010)
Jim Davis s1s Florida Democrat
Susan Davis s1a California Democrat
Cal Dooley s1s California Democrat (Until 2004)
Byron Dorgan s1a ND Democratic Jr Senator (retiring 2010)
John Edwards s1a NC Former Democrat Senator; retired to run for President, 2004
Rahm Emanuel s1a Illinois Former Democrat (until 2009)
Eliot Engel s1a New York Democrat/Liberal
Bob Etheridge s1a North Carolina Democrat (Unseated 2010)
Dianne Feinstein s1a CA Democratic Sr Senator
Dick Gephardt s1a Missouri Democrat (Until 2004)
Al Gore s1a POTUS Democrat
Bob Graham s1a FL Former Democratic Senator; retired 2004
Jane Harman s1a California Democrat (Resigned 2011)
Brian Higgins s1a New York Democrat
Rush Holt s1a New Jersey Democrat
Darlene Hooley s1a Oregon Democrat (Retiring 2008)
Jay Inslee s1a WA Democratic Governor
Steve Israel s1a New York Democrat
Tim Johnson s1a SD Democratic Sr Senator (retiring 2014)
Bob Kerrey s1a NE Democratic Challenger (previously Senator)
John Kerry s1s MA Democratic Sr Senator
Ron Kind s1a WI Former Democratic challenger (2012)
Herbert Kohl s1a WI Democratic Sr Senator (Retiring)
Mary Landrieu s1s LA Democratic Sr Senator
Rick Larsen s1a Washington Democrat
John Larson s1a Connecticut Democrat
Blanche Lambert Lincoln s1s AR Former Democratic Senator
Zoe Lofgren s1a California Democrat
Terry McAuliffe s1a VA Democratic Challenger
Carolyn McCarthy s1a New York Dem./Ind./Working-Families
Mike McIntyre s1a North Carolina Democrat
Gregory Meeks s1a New York Dem./Working-Families
Juanita Millender-McDonald s1a California Democrat
Dennis Moore s1a Kansas Democrat (until 2010)
James Moran s1s Virginia Democrat
Ben Nelson s1a NE Democratic Sr Senator (Retiring)
Bill Nelson s1a FL Democratic Sr Senator
Sam Nunn s1a GA Democratic Senator (Former)
Martin O`Malley s1a MD Democratic Governor
David Eugene Price s1a North Carolina Democrat
Mark Pryor s1a AR Democratic Sr Senator
Charles Robb s1s VA Democratic Senator (Former)
Tim Roemer s1s Indiana Democrat
Loretta Sanchez s1a California Democrat
Adam Schiff s1a California Democrat
Allyson Schwartz s1a Pennsylvania Democratic Governor Challenger
David Scott s1a Georgia Democrat
Kathleen Sebelius s1a KS Former Democratic Governor (1994-2002); Cabinet Sec'y (HHS)
David Adam Smith s1a Washington Democrat
Debbie Stabenow s1a MI Democratic Jr Senator
John Tanner s1a Tennessee Democrat (until 2010)
Ellen Tauscher s1s California Former Democrat (until 2009)
Tom Udall s1a New Mexico Democrat (Senate 2008)
Tom Vilsack s1s IA Former Democratic Governor (1994-2002); Cabinet Sec'y (USDA)
David Wu s1a Oregon Democrat (Resigned 2011)
Independents participating in 00-DLC0
Harold Ford s1a NY 2010 Democratic Primary Challenger; previously US Rep (TN)
Joseph Lieberman s1s CT Independent Sr Senator; Gore's VP nominee (Retiring)
Janet Napolitano s1a US Cabinet
Gavin Newsom s1a 0CA00 S.F. Mayor; former Gov. candidate (2000)
Mike Thurmond s1a GA 2010 Democratic Challenger
Anthony Williams s1a DC00 Washington Mayor
August 5, 2015
From SwampRat in 2008: Does Hillary Clinton support the neoconservative manifesto the Project for the New American Century?
Swamp Rat Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Mar-23-08 02:26 PM
Original message
Does Hillary Clinton support the neoconservative manifesto the Project for the New American Century?
Before you vote for Hillary Clinton, please consider the following:
Research Questions:
Does Hillary Clinton support the neoconservative manifesto the Project for the New American Century (PNAC)?
Will electing her to be the President of the United States not only enable the destruction of the Democratic Party, but will it also damage the U.S. Government for generations, if not forever, thus transforming it into a permanent police state or empire?
Data:
1. Hillary Clinton is a team leader of the Democratic Leadership Council (DLC).
2. Hillary Clinton praised the work of DLC and Progressive Policy Institute (PPI) founders, specifically with regard to their work in transforming the Democratic Party in the manner in which they proscribed (see below).
3-5. The founders of the DLC and PPI are members of or ideologically associated with PNAC; These DLC founders want to transform the Democratic Party, making it compatible with neo-liberalism/neo-conservatism.
________________
1. Hillary Clinton is a DLC team leader:
The DLC Leadership Team
http://www.dlc.org/ndol_ka.cfm?kaid=137
________________
2. Hillary Clinton praises the work of Will Marshall and Al From, among others:
DLC | Speech | July 26, 2005
Remarks of Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton to the 2005 DLC National Conversation
(snip)
"So I would like to start by thanking Al From and Will Marshall, Bruce Reed, and all of the people at the DLC and the PPI, not only for the rich legacy of your ideas, which have helped to transform our party and reinvigorate our country, but for your determination to stay focused on the future, laying the groundwork for the next great era of Democratic leadership."
(snip)
http://www.dlc.org/ndol_ci.cfm?kaid=137&subid=900111&co...
________________
The co-founder of the DLC is a member of PNAC: Will Marshall
3. Will Marshall:
http://rightweb.irc-online.org/profile/1295
(snip)
With Al From, in 1985 Marshall cofounded the DLC, an important bastion of center-right Democrats that was once chaired by Sen. Joseph Lieberman (I-CT). In 1989, Marshall founded the PPI, a think tank that is affiliated with the DLC. Both organizations are sometimes described as neoconservative for their foreign policy positions. In an analysis of the two groups' stance on the Israeli offensive against Hezbollah in summer 2006, Tom Barry wrote: "In practice, though, DLC/PPI positions differ little from that of the Bush administration. As Israel rained bombs down on Lebanon, the DLC's New Dem Dispatch echoed the neoconservative camp in its plea for the Bush administration to avoid the supposed shame of appeasement in the Middle East. Adopting the same line taken by the Bush administration and the Israeli government, the newsletter recommended that the war be taken to Tehran and Damascus, which 'have become clear threats to regional and world peace, and must be isolated and sanctioned, not appeased.'"
(snip)
Marshall was one of 15 analysts who co-wrote the PPI's October 2003 foreign policy blueprint, "Progressive Internationalism: A Democratic National Security Strategy." Using language that closely mirrors that of the neoconservative-led Project for the New American Century (PNAC), the PPI hailed the "tough-minded internationalism" of past Democratic presidents such as Harry Truman. Like PNAC, which in its founding statement warned of grave present dangers confronting America, the PPI strategy declared that, "Today America is threatened once again" and is in need of assertive individuals committed to strong leadership. The authors' observation that, "like the Cold War, the struggle we face today is likely to last not years but decades," echoes both neoconservative and Bush administration national security assessments. As the "Progressive Internationalism" authors explain, the PPI endorsed the invasion of Iraq "because the previous policy of containment was failing, because Saddam posed a grave danger to America as well as to his own brutalized people, and because his blatant defiance of more than a decade's worth of UN Security Council resolutions was undermining both collective security and international law."
(snip)
Although Marshall calls himself a "centrist," he has associated himself with neoconservative organizations and their radical foreign policy agendas. At the onset of the Iraq invasion, Marshall signed statements issued by the Project for the New American Century calling for the removal of Saddam Hussein, advocating that NATO help "secure and destroy all of Iraq's weapons of mass destruction," and arguing that the invasion "can contribute decisively to the democratization of the Middle East."
Marshall's credentials as a liberal hawk have been well established by his affinity for other PNAC-associated groups, including the U.S. Committee on NATO and the Committee for the Liberation of Iraq. Marshall served on the board of directors of the U.S. Committee on NATO alongside such leading neoconservative figures as Robert Kagan, Richard Perle, Randy Scheunemann, Paul Wolfowitz, Stephen Hadley, Peter Rodman, Jeffrey Gedmin, Gary Schmitt, and the committee's founder and president Bruce Jackson. At the request of the Bush administration, Jackson also formed the Committee for the Liberation of Iraq, which, with former DLC chairman Joseph Lieberman serving as co-chair with Sen. John McCain (R-AZ), aimed to build bipartisan support for the liberation, occupation, and democratization of Iraq. Marshall, together with former Democratic Sen. Robert Kerrey of Nebraska (who coauthored "Progressive Internationalism"
, represented the liberal hawk wing of the Democratic Party on the committee's neocon-dominated advisory board. Other advisers included James Woolsey, Eliot Cohen, Newt Gingrich, William Kristol, Jeane Kirkpatrick, Joshua Muravchik, Chris Williams, and Richard Perle.
On February 25, 2003, Marshall joined an array of neoconservatives marshaled by the Social Democrats/USA (SD/USA)—a wellspring of neoconservative strategy—to sign a letter to Bush calling for the invasion of Iraq. Marshall and others asked the president to "act alone if that proves necessary" and then, as a follow-up to a military-induced regime change in Iraq, to implement a democratization plan. The SD/USA letter urged the president to commit his administration to "maintaining substantial U.S. military forces in Iraq for as long as may be required to ensure a stable, representative regime is in place and functioning." Others signing the SD/USA letter included Jackson, Kagan, Woolsey, Hillel Fradkin, Rachelle Horowitz, Penn Kemble, Nina Shea, Michael Novak, Clifford May, and Ben Wattenberg.
(snip)
http://rightweb.irc-online.org/profile/1295
________________
http://rightweb.irc-online.org/profile/1463
4. Democratic Leadership Council
(snip)
The DLC was established in the wake of President Ronald Reagan's 1984 landslide victory, in which he won 49 states, over Democrat Walter Mondale. During the Democratic convention in San Francisco, Mondale had successfully beat back a challenge from Gary Hart, who predicted that unless the Democratic Party adopted a new image it would be decisively defeated. Mondale proved unable to respond effectively to charges from the Republican right and neoconservative Democrats that the Democratic Party was the party of progressives-which Jeane Kirkpatrick variously labeled as the "San Francisco Democrats" and the "blame America first" Democrats-who were out of touch with mainstream America. As Dan Balz and Ronald Brownstein concluded in their book Storming the Gates, "Mondale's landslide defeat exposed as a dead end the vision of regaining the White House by mobilizing an army of the disaffected with a message of unreconstructed liberalism."
Pondering the Mondale defeat, a gathering coalition of Southern Democrats and northern neoliberals expressed concerns that the Democratic Party faced extinction, particularly in the South and West, if the party continued to rely on its New Deal message of government intervention and kept catering to traditional constituencies of labor, minorities, and anti-war progressives. In 1985, Al From, an aide to Rep. Gillis Long (D-LA), took the lead in formulating a new messaging strategy for the party's centrists, neoliberals, and conservatives. Will Marshall, at that time Long's policy analyst and speechwriter, worked closely with From to establish the DLC and then became its first policy director.
In his "Saving the Democratic Party" memo of January 1985, From advocated the formation of a "governing council" that would draft a "blueprint" for reforming the party. According to From, the new leadership should aim to create distance from "the new bosses"-organized labor, feminists, and other progressive constituency groups-that were keeping the party from modernizing. From's memo sparked the formation of the Democratic Leadership Council in early 1985. According to Balz and Brownstein, "Within a few weeks, it counted 75 members, primarily governors and members of Congress, most of them from the Sunbelt, and almost all of them white; liberal critics instantly dubbed the group 'the white male caucus.'"
(snip)
http://rightweb.irc-online.org/profile/1463
________________
http://rightweb.irc-online.org/profile/1534.html
5. Progressive Policy Institute
"Don't look now, but neoconservatism is making a comeback-and not among the Republicans who have made it famous, but in the Democratic Party," declared writer Jacob Heilbrunn in a May 28, 2006 op-ed for the Los Angeles Times. In "Neocons in the Democratic Party," Heilbrunn argued that a new generation of Democratic "pundits and young national security experts" are trying to revive the Cold War precepts of President Harry S. Truman and apply them to the war on terror. "The fledgling neocons of the left are based at places such as the Progressive Policy Institute (PPI), whose president, Will Marshall, has just released a volume of doctrine called With All Our Might: A Progressive Strategy for Defeating Jihadism and Defending Liberty . Their political champions include Connecticut Sen. Joseph Lieberman and such likely presidential candidates as former Virginia Gov. Mark Warner and Iowa Gov. Tom Vilsack, who is chairman of the Democratic Leadership Council (DLC)."
(snip)
PPI, founded in 1989 by Marshall and Al From, is a project of the Third Way Foundation, a nonprofit 501(c)(3) organization. As the think tank for the Democratic Leadership Council, the PPI says its mission "arises from the belief that America is ill-served by an obsolete left-right debate that is out of step with the powerful forces reshaping our society and economy." PPI claims to advocate "a philosophy that adapts the progressive tradition in American politics to the realities of the information age and points to a 'third way' beyond the liberal impulse to defend the bureaucratic status quo and the conservative bid to simply dismantle government."
Marshall and From have long advocated for a "third way" in the political debate that consists of free-market principles that largely echo the right-wing platform, making their organization's name misleading. Indeed, one of PPI's five strategies includes "confronting global disorder by building enduring new international structures of economic and political freedom" (PPI Overview, June 1, 1998).
Marshall is president of the Third Way Foundation and of PPI, and From is the foundation's chairman. Paul Weinstein is the institute's chief operating officer. In fiscal 2004, Third Way board members included Linda Peek Schacht, Charles Alston, William Budinger, William Galston, and Susan Hothem, according to the IRS Form 990 provided at GuideStar.org. PPI staff includes Marshall, Steven Nider (expert in foreign and security studies), Michele Stockwell (education and social policy), David Kendall (health), Edward Gresser (trade), and Jan Mazurek (energy and environment). PPI senior fellows include Weinstein, Andrew Rotherham, Marshall Wittmann, and Fred Siegel. PPI operates on an annual budget approaching $3 million. Seymour Martin Lipset, a leading neoconservative political sociologist, is a former PPI board member, according to a 2002 report by Capital Research Center.
The core principles of the "third way movement" are set forth in the DLC/PPI's 1996 publication, The New Progressive Declaration: A Political Philosophy for the Information Age. As the New Democrats explain, the enduring progressive values must be adapted to the information age, which translates into policy recommendations that are very close to policies articulated by the administration of George W. Bush: uncompromising support for free market and free trade economics, a strong military with a global presence, an end to the politics of entitlement, rejection of affirmative action, and an embrace of competitive enterprise while at the same time rejecting a key role for government in development policy. Expressing the opinion of many progressive Democrats, Robert Kuttner, American Prospect editor, wrote that the political approach of the DLC amounts to "splitting the difference with a Republican administration" (American Prospect, July 7, 2002).
(snip)
http://rightweb.irc-online.org/profile/1534.html
________________
Conclusion:
You decide.
Will a vote for a PNAC-PPI-DLC candidate, not only enable the destruction of the Democratic Party, but will it also empower those who will continue to use our government, hence our good name, to commit and condone mass murder and theft on a global scale?
Should we support people who have openly stated they will reshape our democracy to conform to the mission principles of the PNAC manifesto?
Finally, will this lead to a permanent police state, governed by and for an elite ruling class, thus transforming the United States of America into an empire?
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=132x5222518
DLC's PNAC Document - Hillary Clinton On America's Strategy
From the Council on Foreign Relations' publication.
BY HILLARY CLINTON | NOVEMBER 2011
As the war in Iraq winds down and America begins to withdraw its forces from Afghanistan, the United States stands at a pivot point. Over the last 10 years, we have allocated immense resources to those two theaters. In the next 10 years, we need to be smart and systematic about where we invest time and energy, so that we put ourselves in the best position to sustain our leadership, secure our interests, and advance our values. One of the most important tasks of American statecraft over the next decade will therefore be to lock in a substantially increased investment -- diplomatic, economic, strategic, and otherwise -- in the Asia-Pacific region.
snip---
t a time when the region is building a more mature security and economic architecture to promote stability and prosperity, U.S. commitment there is essential. It will help build that architecture and pay dividends for continued American leadership well into this century, just as our post-World War II commitment to building a comprehensive and lasting transatlantic network of institutions and relationships has paid off many times over -- and continues to do so. The time has come for the United States to make similar investments as a Pacific power, a strategic course set by President Barack Obama from the outset of his administration and one that is already yielding benefits.
With Iraq and Afghanistan still in transition and serious economic challenges in our own country, there are those on the American political scene who are calling for us not to reposition, but to come home. They seek a downsizing of our foreign engagement in favor of our pressing domestic priorities. These impulses are understandable, but they are misguided. Those who say that we can no longer afford to engage with the world have it exactly backward -- we cannot afford not to. From opening new markets for American businesses to curbing nuclear proliferation to keeping the sea lanes free for commerce and navigation, our work abroad holds the key to our prosperity and security at home. For more than six decades, the United States has resisted the gravitational pull of these "come home" debates and the implicit zero-sum logic of these arguments. We must do so again.
snip---
We are also making progress on the Trans-Pacific Partnership (TPP), which will bring together economies from across the Pacific -- developed and developing alike -- into a single trading community. Our goal is to create not just more growth, but better growth. We believe trade agreements need to include strong protections for workers, the environment, intellectual property, and innovation. They should also promote the free flow of information technology and the spread of green technology, as well as the coherence of our regulatory system and the efficiency of supply chains. Ultimately, our progress will be measured by the quality of people's lives -- whether men and women can work in dignity, earn a decent wage, raise healthy families, educate their children, and take hold of the opportunities to improve their own and the next generation's fortunes. Our hope is that a TPP agreement with high standards can serve as a benchmark for future agreements -- and grow to serve as a platform for broader regional interaction and eventually a free trade area of the Asia-Pacific.
http://www.thomhartmann.com/forum/2012/09/dlcs-pnac-document-hillary-clinton-americas-strategy
snip---
t a time when the region is building a more mature security and economic architecture to promote stability and prosperity, U.S. commitment there is essential. It will help build that architecture and pay dividends for continued American leadership well into this century, just as our post-World War II commitment to building a comprehensive and lasting transatlantic network of institutions and relationships has paid off many times over -- and continues to do so. The time has come for the United States to make similar investments as a Pacific power, a strategic course set by President Barack Obama from the outset of his administration and one that is already yielding benefits.
With Iraq and Afghanistan still in transition and serious economic challenges in our own country, there are those on the American political scene who are calling for us not to reposition, but to come home. They seek a downsizing of our foreign engagement in favor of our pressing domestic priorities. These impulses are understandable, but they are misguided. Those who say that we can no longer afford to engage with the world have it exactly backward -- we cannot afford not to. From opening new markets for American businesses to curbing nuclear proliferation to keeping the sea lanes free for commerce and navigation, our work abroad holds the key to our prosperity and security at home. For more than six decades, the United States has resisted the gravitational pull of these "come home" debates and the implicit zero-sum logic of these arguments. We must do so again.
snip---
We are also making progress on the Trans-Pacific Partnership (TPP), which will bring together economies from across the Pacific -- developed and developing alike -- into a single trading community. Our goal is to create not just more growth, but better growth. We believe trade agreements need to include strong protections for workers, the environment, intellectual property, and innovation. They should also promote the free flow of information technology and the spread of green technology, as well as the coherence of our regulatory system and the efficiency of supply chains. Ultimately, our progress will be measured by the quality of people's lives -- whether men and women can work in dignity, earn a decent wage, raise healthy families, educate their children, and take hold of the opportunities to improve their own and the next generation's fortunes. Our hope is that a TPP agreement with high standards can serve as a benchmark for future agreements -- and grow to serve as a platform for broader regional interaction and eventually a free trade area of the Asia-Pacific.
http://www.thomhartmann.com/forum/2012/09/dlcs-pnac-document-hillary-clinton-americas-strategy
From SwampRat in 2008: Does Hillary Clinton support the neoconservative manifesto the Project for the New American Century?
Swamp Rat Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Mar-23-08 02:26 PM
Original message
Does Hillary Clinton support the neoconservative manifesto the Project for the New American Century?
Before you vote for Hillary Clinton, please consider the following:
Research Questions:
Does Hillary Clinton support the neoconservative manifesto the Project for the New American Century (PNAC)?
Will electing her to be the President of the United States not only enable the destruction of the Democratic Party, but will it also damage the U.S. Government for generations, if not forever, thus transforming it into a permanent police state or empire?
Data:
1. Hillary Clinton is a team leader of the Democratic Leadership Council (DLC).
2. Hillary Clinton praised the work of DLC and Progressive Policy Institute (PPI) founders, specifically with regard to their work in transforming the Democratic Party in the manner in which they proscribed (see below).
3-5. The founders of the DLC and PPI are members of or ideologically associated with PNAC; These DLC founders want to transform the Democratic Party, making it compatible with neo-liberalism/neo-conservatism.
________________
1. Hillary Clinton is a DLC team leader:
The DLC Leadership Team
http://www.dlc.org/ndol_ka.cfm?kaid=137
________________
2. Hillary Clinton praises the work of Will Marshall and Al From, among others:
DLC | Speech | July 26, 2005
Remarks of Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton to the 2005 DLC National Conversation
(snip)
"So I would like to start by thanking Al From and Will Marshall, Bruce Reed, and all of the people at the DLC and the PPI, not only for the rich legacy of your ideas, which have helped to transform our party and reinvigorate our country, but for your determination to stay focused on the future, laying the groundwork for the next great era of Democratic leadership."
(snip)
http://www.dlc.org/ndol_ci.cfm?kaid=137&subid=900111&co...
________________
The co-founder of the DLC is a member of PNAC: Will Marshall
3. Will Marshall:
http://rightweb.irc-online.org/profile/1295
(snip)
With Al From, in 1985 Marshall cofounded the DLC, an important bastion of center-right Democrats that was once chaired by Sen. Joseph Lieberman (I-CT). In 1989, Marshall founded the PPI, a think tank that is affiliated with the DLC. Both organizations are sometimes described as neoconservative for their foreign policy positions. In an analysis of the two groups' stance on the Israeli offensive against Hezbollah in summer 2006, Tom Barry wrote: "In practice, though, DLC/PPI positions differ little from that of the Bush administration. As Israel rained bombs down on Lebanon, the DLC's New Dem Dispatch echoed the neoconservative camp in its plea for the Bush administration to avoid the supposed shame of appeasement in the Middle East. Adopting the same line taken by the Bush administration and the Israeli government, the newsletter recommended that the war be taken to Tehran and Damascus, which 'have become clear threats to regional and world peace, and must be isolated and sanctioned, not appeased.'"
(snip)
Marshall was one of 15 analysts who co-wrote the PPI's October 2003 foreign policy blueprint, "Progressive Internationalism: A Democratic National Security Strategy." Using language that closely mirrors that of the neoconservative-led Project for the New American Century (PNAC), the PPI hailed the "tough-minded internationalism" of past Democratic presidents such as Harry Truman. Like PNAC, which in its founding statement warned of grave present dangers confronting America, the PPI strategy declared that, "Today America is threatened once again" and is in need of assertive individuals committed to strong leadership. The authors' observation that, "like the Cold War, the struggle we face today is likely to last not years but decades," echoes both neoconservative and Bush administration national security assessments. As the "Progressive Internationalism" authors explain, the PPI endorsed the invasion of Iraq "because the previous policy of containment was failing, because Saddam posed a grave danger to America as well as to his own brutalized people, and because his blatant defiance of more than a decade's worth of UN Security Council resolutions was undermining both collective security and international law."
(snip)
Although Marshall calls himself a "centrist," he has associated himself with neoconservative organizations and their radical foreign policy agendas. At the onset of the Iraq invasion, Marshall signed statements issued by the Project for the New American Century calling for the removal of Saddam Hussein, advocating that NATO help "secure and destroy all of Iraq's weapons of mass destruction," and arguing that the invasion "can contribute decisively to the democratization of the Middle East."
Marshall's credentials as a liberal hawk have been well established by his affinity for other PNAC-associated groups, including the U.S. Committee on NATO and the Committee for the Liberation of Iraq. Marshall served on the board of directors of the U.S. Committee on NATO alongside such leading neoconservative figures as Robert Kagan, Richard Perle, Randy Scheunemann, Paul Wolfowitz, Stephen Hadley, Peter Rodman, Jeffrey Gedmin, Gary Schmitt, and the committee's founder and president Bruce Jackson. At the request of the Bush administration, Jackson also formed the Committee for the Liberation of Iraq, which, with former DLC chairman Joseph Lieberman serving as co-chair with Sen. John McCain (R-AZ), aimed to build bipartisan support for the liberation, occupation, and democratization of Iraq. Marshall, together with former Democratic Sen. Robert Kerrey of Nebraska (who coauthored "Progressive Internationalism"
, represented the liberal hawk wing of the Democratic Party on the committee's neocon-dominated advisory board. Other advisers included James Woolsey, Eliot Cohen, Newt Gingrich, William Kristol, Jeane Kirkpatrick, Joshua Muravchik, Chris Williams, and Richard Perle.
On February 25, 2003, Marshall joined an array of neoconservatives marshaled by the Social Democrats/USA (SD/USA)—a wellspring of neoconservative strategy—to sign a letter to Bush calling for the invasion of Iraq. Marshall and others asked the president to "act alone if that proves necessary" and then, as a follow-up to a military-induced regime change in Iraq, to implement a democratization plan. The SD/USA letter urged the president to commit his administration to "maintaining substantial U.S. military forces in Iraq for as long as may be required to ensure a stable, representative regime is in place and functioning." Others signing the SD/USA letter included Jackson, Kagan, Woolsey, Hillel Fradkin, Rachelle Horowitz, Penn Kemble, Nina Shea, Michael Novak, Clifford May, and Ben Wattenberg.
(snip)
http://rightweb.irc-online.org/profile/1295
________________
http://rightweb.irc-online.org/profile/1463
4. Democratic Leadership Council
(snip)
The DLC was established in the wake of President Ronald Reagan's 1984 landslide victory, in which he won 49 states, over Democrat Walter Mondale. During the Democratic convention in San Francisco, Mondale had successfully beat back a challenge from Gary Hart, who predicted that unless the Democratic Party adopted a new image it would be decisively defeated. Mondale proved unable to respond effectively to charges from the Republican right and neoconservative Democrats that the Democratic Party was the party of progressives-which Jeane Kirkpatrick variously labeled as the "San Francisco Democrats" and the "blame America first" Democrats-who were out of touch with mainstream America. As Dan Balz and Ronald Brownstein concluded in their book Storming the Gates, "Mondale's landslide defeat exposed as a dead end the vision of regaining the White House by mobilizing an army of the disaffected with a message of unreconstructed liberalism."
Pondering the Mondale defeat, a gathering coalition of Southern Democrats and northern neoliberals expressed concerns that the Democratic Party faced extinction, particularly in the South and West, if the party continued to rely on its New Deal message of government intervention and kept catering to traditional constituencies of labor, minorities, and anti-war progressives. In 1985, Al From, an aide to Rep. Gillis Long (D-LA), took the lead in formulating a new messaging strategy for the party's centrists, neoliberals, and conservatives. Will Marshall, at that time Long's policy analyst and speechwriter, worked closely with From to establish the DLC and then became its first policy director.
In his "Saving the Democratic Party" memo of January 1985, From advocated the formation of a "governing council" that would draft a "blueprint" for reforming the party. According to From, the new leadership should aim to create distance from "the new bosses"-organized labor, feminists, and other progressive constituency groups-that were keeping the party from modernizing. From's memo sparked the formation of the Democratic Leadership Council in early 1985. According to Balz and Brownstein, "Within a few weeks, it counted 75 members, primarily governors and members of Congress, most of them from the Sunbelt, and almost all of them white; liberal critics instantly dubbed the group 'the white male caucus.'"
(snip)
http://rightweb.irc-online.org/profile/1463
________________
http://rightweb.irc-online.org/profile/1534.html
5. Progressive Policy Institute
"Don't look now, but neoconservatism is making a comeback-and not among the Republicans who have made it famous, but in the Democratic Party," declared writer Jacob Heilbrunn in a May 28, 2006 op-ed for the Los Angeles Times. In "Neocons in the Democratic Party," Heilbrunn argued that a new generation of Democratic "pundits and young national security experts" are trying to revive the Cold War precepts of President Harry S. Truman and apply them to the war on terror. "The fledgling neocons of the left are based at places such as the Progressive Policy Institute (PPI), whose president, Will Marshall, has just released a volume of doctrine called With All Our Might: A Progressive Strategy for Defeating Jihadism and Defending Liberty . Their political champions include Connecticut Sen. Joseph Lieberman and such likely presidential candidates as former Virginia Gov. Mark Warner and Iowa Gov. Tom Vilsack, who is chairman of the Democratic Leadership Council (DLC)."
(snip)
PPI, founded in 1989 by Marshall and Al From, is a project of the Third Way Foundation, a nonprofit 501(c)(3) organization. As the think tank for the Democratic Leadership Council, the PPI says its mission "arises from the belief that America is ill-served by an obsolete left-right debate that is out of step with the powerful forces reshaping our society and economy." PPI claims to advocate "a philosophy that adapts the progressive tradition in American politics to the realities of the information age and points to a 'third way' beyond the liberal impulse to defend the bureaucratic status quo and the conservative bid to simply dismantle government."
Marshall and From have long advocated for a "third way" in the political debate that consists of free-market principles that largely echo the right-wing platform, making their organization's name misleading. Indeed, one of PPI's five strategies includes "confronting global disorder by building enduring new international structures of economic and political freedom" (PPI Overview, June 1, 1998).
Marshall is president of the Third Way Foundation and of PPI, and From is the foundation's chairman. Paul Weinstein is the institute's chief operating officer. In fiscal 2004, Third Way board members included Linda Peek Schacht, Charles Alston, William Budinger, William Galston, and Susan Hothem, according to the IRS Form 990 provided at GuideStar.org. PPI staff includes Marshall, Steven Nider (expert in foreign and security studies), Michele Stockwell (education and social policy), David Kendall (health), Edward Gresser (trade), and Jan Mazurek (energy and environment). PPI senior fellows include Weinstein, Andrew Rotherham, Marshall Wittmann, and Fred Siegel. PPI operates on an annual budget approaching $3 million. Seymour Martin Lipset, a leading neoconservative political sociologist, is a former PPI board member, according to a 2002 report by Capital Research Center.
The core principles of the "third way movement" are set forth in the DLC/PPI's 1996 publication, The New Progressive Declaration: A Political Philosophy for the Information Age. As the New Democrats explain, the enduring progressive values must be adapted to the information age, which translates into policy recommendations that are very close to policies articulated by the administration of George W. Bush: uncompromising support for free market and free trade economics, a strong military with a global presence, an end to the politics of entitlement, rejection of affirmative action, and an embrace of competitive enterprise while at the same time rejecting a key role for government in development policy. Expressing the opinion of many progressive Democrats, Robert Kuttner, American Prospect editor, wrote that the political approach of the DLC amounts to "splitting the difference with a Republican administration" (American Prospect, July 7, 2002).
(snip)
http://rightweb.irc-online.org/profile/1534.html
________________
Conclusion:
You decide.
Will a vote for a PNAC-PPI-DLC candidate, not only enable the destruction of the Democratic Party, but will it also empower those who will continue to use our government, hence our good name, to commit and condone mass murder and theft on a global scale?
Should we support people who have openly stated they will reshape our democracy to conform to the mission principles of the PNAC manifesto?
Finally, will this lead to a permanent police state, governed by and for an elite ruling class, thus transforming the United States of America into an empire?
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=132x5222518
August 5, 2015
Hillary Clinton Sides with NSA over Snowden Disclosures
Likely 2016 presidential candidate Hillary Clinton has taken a firm stance against the actions of NSA whistleblower Edward Snowden, denying his revelations have brought any positive impacts and slamming him for accepting asylum in Russia.
Speaking with NPR's Terry Gross on Thursday, Clinton claimed Snowden could have "expressed his concerns" in other ways "by reaching out to some of the senators or other members of Congress or journalists in order to convey his questions about the implementation of the laws surrounding the collection of information concerning Americans' calls and emails."
Her comments sparked criticism from progressives, journalists and civil liberties advocates.
snip----
The former U.S. Secretary of State defended U.S. mass surveillance, stating, "collecting information about what’s going around the world is essential to our security." She added, "The pieces about the metadata collection, the other impacts on Americans, is a small sliver of what was stolen. Most of what was stolen concerned the surveillance that the United States undertakes, totally legally, against other nations."
http://www.commondreams.org/news/2014/06/13/hillary-clinton-sides-nsa-over-snowden-disclosures
Speaking with NPR's Terry Gross on Thursday, Clinton claimed Snowden could have "expressed his concerns" in other ways "by reaching out to some of the senators or other members of Congress or journalists in order to convey his questions about the implementation of the laws surrounding the collection of information concerning Americans' calls and emails."
Her comments sparked criticism from progressives, journalists and civil liberties advocates.
snip----
The former U.S. Secretary of State defended U.S. mass surveillance, stating, "collecting information about what’s going around the world is essential to our security." She added, "The pieces about the metadata collection, the other impacts on Americans, is a small sliver of what was stolen. Most of what was stolen concerned the surveillance that the United States undertakes, totally legally, against other nations."
http://www.commondreams.org/news/2014/06/13/hillary-clinton-sides-nsa-over-snowden-disclosures
On the NSA, Hillary Clinton Is Either a Fool or a Liar
Who is the true patriot, Hillary Clinton or Edward Snowden? The question comes up because Clinton has gone all out in attacking Snowden as a means of burnishing her hawkish credentials, eliciting Glenn Greenwald’s comment that she is “like a neocon, practically.”
On Friday in England, Clinton boasted that two years ago she had favored a proposal by a top British General to train 100,000 “moderate” rebels to overthrow the Assad regime in Syria, but Obama had turned her down. The American Thatcher? In that same interview with the Guardian she also managed to get in yet another shot against Snowden for taking refuge in Russia “apparently under Putin’s protection,” unless, she taunted, “he wishes to return knowing he would be held accountable.”
Accountable for telling the truth that Clinton concealed during her tenure as secretary of state in the Obama administration? Did she approve of the systematic spying on the American people as well as of others around the world, including the leaders of Germany and Brazil, or did she first learn of all this from the Snowden revelations?
On Saturday, a carefully vetted four-month investigation by The Washington Post based on material made available by Snowden revealed that while Clinton was in the government, the NSA had collected a vast trove of often intimate Internet correspondence and photos of innocent Americans, including many users of Facebook, Google, Yahoo, Microsoft and other leading Internet companies. The Post reported many files “described as useless by the [NSA] analysts but nonetheless retained…have a voyeuristic quality. They tell stories of love and heartbreak, illicit sexual liaisons, mental-health crises, political and religious conversions, financial anxieties and disappointed hopes.”
http://www.thenation.com/article/nsa-hillary-clinton-either-fool-or-liar/
Who is the true patriot, Hillary Clinton or Edward Snowden? The question comes up because Clinton has gone all out in attacking Snowden as a means of burnishing her hawkish credentials, eliciting Glenn Greenwald’s comment that she is “like a neocon, practically.”
On Friday in England, Clinton boasted that two years ago she had favored a proposal by a top British General to train 100,000 “moderate” rebels to overthrow the Assad regime in Syria, but Obama had turned her down. The American Thatcher? In that same interview with the Guardian she also managed to get in yet another shot against Snowden for taking refuge in Russia “apparently under Putin’s protection,” unless, she taunted, “he wishes to return knowing he would be held accountable.”
Accountable for telling the truth that Clinton concealed during her tenure as secretary of state in the Obama administration? Did she approve of the systematic spying on the American people as well as of others around the world, including the leaders of Germany and Brazil, or did she first learn of all this from the Snowden revelations?
On Saturday, a carefully vetted four-month investigation by The Washington Post based on material made available by Snowden revealed that while Clinton was in the government, the NSA had collected a vast trove of often intimate Internet correspondence and photos of innocent Americans, including many users of Facebook, Google, Yahoo, Microsoft and other leading Internet companies. The Post reported many files “described as useless by the [NSA] analysts but nonetheless retained…have a voyeuristic quality. They tell stories of love and heartbreak, illicit sexual liaisons, mental-health crises, political and religious conversions, financial anxieties and disappointed hopes.”
http://www.thenation.com/article/nsa-hillary-clinton-either-fool-or-liar/
August 2, 2015
Never confuse non-violent attempts to prevent people from consciously, or unconsciously,
causing violence, death, and destruction, with hatred.
http://www.democraticunderground.com/10026919915
"We Didn't Know" is always the same lie, the same lame excuse, that is used after the body counts are done.
Profile Information
Gender: FemaleCurrent location: Earth
Member since: Tue Sep 23, 2003, 11:05 PM
Number of posts: 27,670
