Miriam and All,
Talking about compromising as part of our daily life. That works well
so long as both parties can live with the resulting compromise.
Like the other night. We were out late seeing a couple of new
clients. As we came into Sequim, I had a sudden craving for Pizza.
"Let's pick up a family size Papa Murphy's", I suggested. Cathy said,
"It's late and if I eat Pizza I'll have indigestion all night. How
about BLT's?"
Well, I really wanted Pizza, but at the same time I know how Cathy
suffers if she eats tomato sauces just prior to bed time. And I know
how this suffering effects her normal sweet disposition.
"I can live with that," I said. And I did.
But voting for Hillary Clinton is not a compromise, for me. She is
totally under the spell of the Empire. The Establishment. Bought and
paid for, although she spins some fantasy about being able to take big
piles of money without being beholden to the givers. But is voting
for Hillary a compromise? No. Clinton is Empire Light compared to
Trump's Empire Heavy. That's like telling Cathy that we can still
pick up that Papa Murphy's Pizza, only we'll have it with Light Sauce.
Forget that, Light indigestion is no better than heavy indigestion at
bed time. Especially when I have to live with the results. I already
compromised by voting for Obama in 2008. Was I able to live with that
8 year compromise? Well, I'm still here, if that's living with the
Obama compromise. But lots of people are not here. Little children
playing in the fields of Iraq, blown to bloody pieces by Obama Drones.
Folks separated from their children and shipped back "to where they
came from". More hidden unemployment. More families suffering from
their inability to cover the basic costs of maintaining a family. No,
I don't think that signing up for another 8 years of the same old same
old, is a compromise. It is called, "Hope Lost".
And after the election I will go back to working for changes in the
Law that will bring some relief to the Working Class. Even knowing
that it is not my government. Even knowing that it is not a
compromise if Hillary sits in the Obal Office. But I will join any
fight to force changes, no matter how small, into this foreign Empire
that has destroyed any hope of democracy.
Carl Jarvis
On 6/29/16, Miriam Vieni <miriamvieni@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
There are a lot of people who don't want to live in a totally different
system. They want to return to the kind of regulated capitalism that
existed
from the end of the depression until the mid 70's. That is what, I believe
Sanders would like, except with a government single payer system rather
than
medical insurance paid for by employers. That is also what a lot of the
white working class would like. I'm not ssaying that you should agree with
them. I'm saying that it is necessary to recognize what many people are
thinking.
Miriam
-----Original Message-----
From: blind-democracy-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
[mailto:blind-democracy-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of Roger Loran
Bailey (Redacted sender "rogerbailey81" for DMARC)
Sent: Wednesday, June 29, 2016 9:55 PM
To: blind-democracy@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: [blind-democracy] Re: [blind-democracy] RE: [blind-democracy] RE:
[blind-democracy] Interview with Socialist Action's presidential candidate,
Jeff Mackler
The trouble with working within the system to bring about change is that
when it is the system that you want to change you are rather defeating
yourself. It appears pretty obvious to me that when someone is committed to
working within the system to bring about change that person is not
interested in changing the system.
On 6/29/2016 5:57 PM, Bob Hachey wrote:
Hi Miriam,believe that Sanders was and is working to better the lives of the bottom
While I agree with a good bit of what Mackler has to say here, I
sincerely
50
percent of income earners. I agree with you that Sanders believes that
working within the system is the best way to win some real change. But I
think we were all pretty sure that sanders would throw his support to
Clinton in the end.
Also, Sanders support for much of our current foreign policy does not fitin well with the change he says he wants.
Seems to me, the bottom line is how much change do we want and what areprepared to risk to implement such change? No doubt that the two parties in
we
power now will fight tooth and nail to hold onto that power in the face of
any others no matter what their party. I believe that if, let's say, Jill
Stein or Alyson Kennedy were ever able to mount a serious threat to the
establishment, we'd see some mighty ugly behavior and possibly violence
perpetrated by the leadership of both parties against that threat. Until
and
unless we can reverse the Cittizens VS. United decision, I don't think
we'll
see the kind of change that you and I might like.
Bob Hachey
