HomeLatest ThreadsGreatest ThreadsForums & GroupsMy SubscriptionsMy Posts
DU Home » Latest Threads » fleabiscuit » Journal
Page: « Prev 1 2

fleabiscuit

Profile Information

Gender: Male
Hometown: Oregon coast
Member since: Tue Aug 28, 2012, 02:21 PM
Number of posts: 4,439

Journal Archives

"Hillary Clinton’s all-American scarlet letter"

Somehow I missed this one. Makes me want to fight harder.

THE PURITY PARADOX
Hillary Clinton’s all-American scarlet letter

“There is something in the United States’s cultural imagination that has long prevented it from envisioning—and electing—a female leader. This observation is supported by a recent United Nation’s report that ranks the supposedly progressive United States 75th for the number of women in positions of political leadership. Currently, there are twenty-two countries led by a woman.

Perhaps Americans’ reluctance to elect a female leader—and their particular antipathy toward Democratic candidate Hillary Clinton—can be traced to the country’s puritanical origins. Other countries have a long tradition of recognizing and valuing women as leaders. Their myths include female gods and their histories are replete with female political icons, from Kali and Athena to Joan of Arc and Eva Perón….”

“…Even in 2016, there is little that America hates more than a “tainted,” experienced woman—especially a woman who believes her experience to be advantageous. Because Hillary is a woman with a past, the theory goes, she needs to atone. For example, that means she needs to take responsibility for her husband’s presidency and alleged sexual indiscretions.

In politics, the moral opposite of experienced is “pure.” And this is precisely the angle that Bernie Sanders’s campaign and supporters have taken this primary season. Susan Sarandon, for example, gave an interview with the Daily Mail proclaiming her allegiance to Sanders because he is “untainted.” Sanders has been painted as the pure ideologue, a political outsider who has been able to somehow transcend the political fray. In truth, he’s a longtime liberal senator who has served the Democratic party for decades. (Sanders has in the past registered as an Independent but caucuses with the Democrats in the Senate and is seeking the Democratic party nomination.)…”

“…Sanders’ male privilege, on the other hand, means that he can afford to position himself as an anti-establishment, ideological purist. “He gets away with proposing unrealistic policy ideas that have little chance of being passed even by Democrats in Congress, let alone Republicans,” Michael A. Cohen wrote in a recent piece for the Boston Globe, “and then gets praised for being authentic….”

http://qz.com/606400/hillary-clintons-all-american-scarlet-letter/

From SFGATE, Ppretty much nails it.

On social media I’ve blocked/ghosted literally thousands of “friends” since the last two elections.

My intolerance is growing.

“…But hear this now, hardcore Sanders zealots: it’s become jarringly evident that many of you are losing perspective, becoming unhinged, veering way too close, in your savage anti-Hillary screeds, pro grumpy-old-populist obsessiveness and manic refusal to acknowledge historical context, toward raging fundamentalism.
You know, like an NRA fanatic. Like a Trump rage-aholic. A Mormon homophobe. A Planned Parenthood firebomber. Beware….”

http://blog.sfgate.com/morford/2016/02/10/feel-the-bern-or-give-em-hill-but-please-chill-out/

Oh that was nearly 7 years ago.

In the .net period we are in years that are faster than dog years. Besides, what is a lefty? That's just someone who usually stands on the other side of home base, not much of a descriptor.

There's the trees getting in the way of the forest.

I find arguments that migrate to the picky details instead of focusing on the structure distracting, although you are apparently fortunate to have a "bloated" higher education opportunity where you are at. I don't find a large "bloated" education problem in my state. Conformity to a process started with Carter would be an interesting argument IMHO.

I assumed so, but I'm trying to kick the habit.

There were a lot of assumptions I used to make but no longer do.

'We should be seeking out forms of authority and domination, and challenging their legitimacy. Sometimes they are legitimate, that is they are needed for survival. Any form of coercion and control requires justification and most of them are completely unjustifiable.

One major system of domination that is not being seriously addressed that is really at the core of the system of domination is private control over resources. That means an attack on the fundamental structure of state capitalism. That is in order, it’s not something far off into the future.'
paraphrase ~ Noam Chomsky

I like that guy.

Edit: BTW, don't think anyone is trying to "own the air?" Think carbon tax, and cap and trade. Perhaps it's NOT your air.

We, our, or us? Just who are you talking about?

It’s important to make the distinction. People are agents of morality, the State is an agent of power. It’s democracy 101 is it not? Feel free to debate all the morality of Russia and the US all you want, but the instant a State response is given it is an act of Power not Morality. Let's keep it in mind, there could be a reaction.

There is a couple of decent posts on DU regarding David Simon.

IMHO, worth a quick site search and a watch.

A paraphrase of a couple of my favorite parts.

Festival of Dangerous Ideas 2013: David Simon

7:55 ...that notion that profit is the metric by which we are going to measure the health of our society is one of the fundamental mistakes of the last 30 years. It begins, I would date it in my country, to about 1980 exactly, and it has triumphed. And ultimately the farce of this argument that seemingly where capitalism stomped the hell out of Marxism by the end of the 20th century, and was predominate in all respects. The great irony of it is that the only thing that actually works is non ideological, is impure, has elements of both arguments, and never actually achieves any kind of partisan or philosophical perfection. It’s pragmatic, it includes the best aspects of socialistic thought and of free market capitalism, and it works, because we don’t let it work entirely….

11:50.…And ultimately we abandoned that. And we believed in the idea of trickle down, and the idea of the market economy, and the market knows best. To the point where now libertarianism in my country is actually being taken seriously as an intelligent mode of political thought. It’s astonishing to me. But it is, people are saying “I don’t need anything but my ability to earn a profit. I’m not connected to society. I don’t care how the road got built, I don’t care where the firefighter comes from. I don’t care who educates the kids others than my kids. I am me.” It’s the triumph of the self. I am me, hear me roar….
Go to Page: « Prev 1 2