Dick,
I agree with your first statements.
But I vehemently disagree with the last.
Alice
On Aug 9, 2015, at 10:30 PM, R. E. Driscoll Sr <llocsirdsr@xxxxxxx> wrote:
Miriam:
You have made a statement of great wisdom. The white leaders are doing a
disservice to the white people, the black leaders are doing a disservice to
the black people, the Communist Leaders of China are doing disservice to the
Communist people of China and so on ad infinitum.
However, I am beginning to think that the Republican Want to Be People might
produce a leader of some ability.
R. E. (Dick) Driscoll, Sr.
On 8/9/2015 4:40 PM, Miriam Vieni wrote:
I haven't heard or seen that story yet. If it's true, if these were young,
angry black activists, they're not choosing the right candidates to fight.
They're choosing someone who is an easy target. Given their life experience,
it's difficult for them to know just who the enemy is. After we moved to
Westbury and I became active in the PTA, there was a meeting of the PTA of
thepreK through second grade school at my house one night. After the meeting
was over, two women remained. They were two residents of the ghetto area,
adjacent to the area where I lived. They stayed quite late, drinking coffee,
nibbling cake, and gossiping. They talked about a lot of the people who were
active in the school community, both black and white, and as they let their
guard down and expressed their true feelings, it became apparent, that they
felt threatened on every side. People whom I assumed were trusted leaders in
the black vcommunity, were suspect. They talked about plots and counterplots
and suspected ulterior motives. Whatever the true facts may have been, the
world in which they lived was terrifying and threatening because they felt
that they couldn't depend on the good intentions or honesty of anyone. Given
the world we live in today, that's probably still true for all of the
African Americans who live in ghettoes today. If they can't count on a black
President and a black attorney general to protect them, how can they trust
an old Jewish guy from Vermont?
Miriam
-----Original Message-----
From: blind-democracy-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
[mailto:blind-democracy-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of Carl Jarvis
Sent: Sunday, August 09, 2015 3:59 PM
To: blind-democracy@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: [blind-democracy] Re: Republican Assault on Trump May Only Make Him
Stronger
Odds say you're right, Miriam. But since the only outside chance of my
having some part of this government, I'll keep on plugging Bernie Sanders
until he drops.
By the way, did you hear that Bernie was blocked from speaking in Seattle at
the West Lake Mall?
He was able to get the mike later that evening on the U of W campus.
I didn't get the entire story, and heaven only knows if the media's story
bore any relationship to the truth, but apparently two activists took the
mike away and held it for 20 minutes. If I'd been there wanting to listen
to Sanders, and even though I'm sympathetic to the Black Rights causes, I'd
have been put out. If this continues it can hurt Sanders. Hurting Sanders
is not going to help Blacks. The best they can hope for will be Hillary
Clinton. That is not a good replacement.
Carl Jarvis
On 8/9/15, Miriam Vieni <miriamvieni@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
On the contrary, I think that Taibbi is quite serious. What he isOhaving some part of this government, I'll keep on plugging Bernie Sanders
saying is
until he drops.
that when the more mainstream Republicans attack Trump, they areelection.
verifying the beliefs of the lunatic fringe that the establishment is
monolithic, and that it needs a true rebel, someone who will voice
their ideas openly, to oppose it. The Tea Party, the Survivalists, the
White Supremacists, the Dominionists, he's their guy. What that means
is that it ensures that a right wing Democrat, Clinton, will win the
Miriam
-----Original Message-----
From: blind-democracy-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
[mailto:blind-democracy-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of Carl Jarvis
Sent: Sunday, August 09, 2015 12:22 PM
To: blind-democracy@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: [blind-democracy] Re: Republican Assault on Trump May Only
Make Him Stronger
I know that Matt Taibbi is writing tongue in cheek, but still...
This entire sham, this "Let's Pretend" debate was exactly what it was
intended to be. Entertainment. It was like the old TV show, The
Bachelors on steroids. A bunch of egotists strutting their stuff,
hoping the pretty bachelorette will select them. Well, maybe Trump
was the exception. But I've already written my thoughts on his
involvement. I will say in addition, Trump is not, absolutely not a
man who cares for the well being of the American People. His contempt
for all of us, not just women or Mexicans, hangs out on his face and
drips from his sneering lips.
But the major contribution of this so called debate was to keep
attention off any meaningful discussion of issues. The loyal fans in
the audience ate it up, clapping and guffawing and shouting their
approval over the blood letting.
It did make me laugh, too. But that's my Black Humor. All in all it
should scare us.
Carl Jarvis
On 8/8/15, Miriam Vieni <miriamvieni@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
Taibbi writes: "Last night's debate was the funniest politicaland.
program in our nation's history. Nothing really comes close."
Donald Trump was the punching bag at Thursday's Fox News GOP debate.
(photo:
Chip Somodevilla/Getty)
Republican Assault on Trump May Only Make Him Stronger By Matt
Taibbi, Rolling Stone
08 August 15
Party insiders ganged up on Trump in the first GOP debate, but the
tactic may backfire
Last night's debate was the funniest political program in our
nation's history. Nothing really comes close.
There have been moments, obviously. Bush ducking a shoe. Admiral
Stockdale saying "Who am I? Why am I here?" Sarah Palin being
interviewed while a man in the background beheaded turkeys was a classic.
But for comic staying power and sheer WTF factor last night's debate
went beyond 11. By my count there were over a dozen genuine
laugh-out-loud moments. Mike Huckabee bringing pimps into a
presidential debate for the first time ever was a landmark moment.
Jeb Bush's attempt at a one-liner, "They call me Veto Corrleone,"
made millions of adults cringe at the same time. Then there was Megyn
Kelly's brain-busting toss to commercial near the
end:
KELLY: We have to stand you by, because after the break, we're going
to let the candidates make their closing statements, their final
thoughts,
God.not escape.
Is it really possible we made it this far in the television era
without reaching this point: We'll be right back - with God!
God was really the only character missing from that debate last night.
Almost everyone else was there, in the repartee if not in person:
Rosie O'Donnell, LeBron James, Putin, St. Peter, St. Reagan, Siamese
twins, pigs, dogs, slobs, a gay friend of John Kasich, etc. The list
went on and on. It was a real parade of stars.
Of course the main character was Donald Trump, who dominated the
time-of-possession game and spoke nearly 500 words more than the next
closest competitor. In thinking about what actually happened last
night, i.e. what was meaningful as opposed to merely lurid and
entertaining, you have to start with the performance of Trump, who
might just have lured the Republican Party into a trap from which it
will
There was clearly an effort last night by Republican party interestsparty,"
to knock Trump off his frontrunner pedestal. We saw ambush tactics
from the start.
Bret Baier started the whole thing off by asking the candidates to
promise they wouldn't run on a third-party ticket. Trump declined,
highlighting his non-Republican-ness. Megyn Kelly followed up by
asking Trump to defend his record of calling women "fat pigs" and
"disgusting animals" and then made his probable inability to score
female votes in a race against Hillary part of her question.
Later questions targeted Trump's heretical views on abortion and
health care, and his history of donating money to the likes of
Hillary Clinton and Nancy Pelosi.
No other candidate got anything near this kind of treatment in the
debate.
A
more typical question was Baier softballing Mike Huckabee, asking:
"Is the government simply too big for any one person, even a
Republican, to shrink?"
Then there was the postgame show. Fox had pollster Frank Luntz come
on and speak with a "focus group" that expressed concern about the
damage Trump will do to the party. One respondent said Trump was
"splitting the
while another said, "If he runs third party, Republicans lose. Period."Bentsen.
The uninspiring showing in the Luntz group contrasted with some other
post-debate surveys, including one on the Drudge Report showing Trump
as the clear winner of the debate.
That Fox and the other "contestants" onstage were ganging up on Trump
was clear enough, but it hasn't stopped there. Trump is now also
seeing a wave of punditry pieces flowing in from traditional
conservative outlets slamming his campaign. The National Review's
Jonah Goldberg wrote a long piece this month, "Trump fans, it's time
for an intervention."
Stung by Trump's criticism of him as a guy who "couldn't buy a pair
of pants," Goldberg blasted Trump as a grifter and a RINO who is
easier to believe as a "stalking horse for his dear friend Hillary"
than as a Republican nominee.
Meanwhile, Rich Lowry at the Review called the debate a "fabulously
awful"
night for Trump. He slobbered over the rest of the field. He said
Bush "made no mistakes, " Christie was "forceful," Carson was "winsome,"
Kasich "more of a presence than I would have thought," and Huckabee
was "incapable of having a bad debate."
Meanwhile, Fox contributor Charles Krauthammer gleefully declared the
debate to be the "end of Trump," saying that he looked "lost." He's
been an ongoing critic of the Donald, along with other Republican
stalwarts like George Will, who not long ago asked, "If Trump were a
Democratic mole, how would his behavior be any different?"
It's not a mystery why this is happening. Every indicator shows that
if Trump gets the nomination, it will result in a monster wipeout at
the hands of a Democrat like Hillary Clinton. Moreover the
embarrassment of having to throw their weight behind a deranged
narcissist might cripple the party for a generation.
Trump, they surely know, will make Barry Goldwater look like Lloyd
The damage he could do with a full general election season behind theMarxist bondage.
wheel of the Republican brand is almost too awesome to contemplate.
What the Goldbergs and the Wills and Krauthammers of the world
probably don't get is that by singling Trump out for abuse, they're
almost certainly boosting his campaign. First of all, while it might
have looked like a damning image to see Trump alone onstage with his
hand up and refusing to pledge not to run as an Independent, on
another level it was a great Trump moment. As it has been all season,
there was Trump, and everyone else. That scene just made the other
nine guys onstage look like what they are, stooges beholden to their
party and their donors, unable to think for themselves.
The main argument of all of Trump's conservative critics seems to be,
"He's not a real Republican! He'll destroy the party establishment!"
The people making these criticisms seem to assume that conservative
voters will see this as a bad thing.
But there are plenty of Tea Party-type voters out there who hate the
Republican Party establishment almost as much as they hate the Democrats.
There are also plenty of right-wing voters who think George Will and
Charles Krauthammer are smug media weasels only slightly less
disgusting than the Rachel Maddows and Keith Olbermanns of the world.
A know-it-all is a know-it-all.
Trump's followers are a gang of pissed-off nativists who are tired of
being laughed at, belittled, dismissed, and told who to vote for. So
it seems incredible that the Republican establishment thinks it's
going to get rid of Trump by laughing at, belittling and dismissing
him, and telling his voters who they should be picking.
These hysterical critics are making one of the world's most
irredeemable bullies look persecuted and like a victim, a difficult
feat. The desperation to get rid of him may just feed more and more
into the right wing base's crazy victim complex, and in turn get
Trump even more support.
The numbers aren't out yet, but it wouldn't surprise me at all if the
debate last night didn't have exactly the opposite impact that
Krauthammer and Frank Luntz and the rest of those clowns thinks it
had.
Assuming this doesn't all end in Trump becoming president and the
world shortly thereafter ending in nuclear apocalypse, this twist
might end up being the funniest thing to come out of the debate and
the campaign in general.
The Republican party and its allies at Fox, on afternoon radio and in
the blogosphere have spent many years now whipping audiences into
zombie-style bloodlusts. When it suited them, party insiders told
voters across middle America that foreigners were trying to crawl
through their windows to take their wives, and that stuffed suits in
Washington and in the media were conspiring to enslave their children
in
Now all of that paranoia is backing up on them. They created thisand.
monster, and it's coming for them now. Trumpenstein lives. He is
loose in the town and on his way to the doctor's castle. We may not
be laughing two years from now, but for the time being, man, what a show.
Error! Hyperlink reference not valid. Error! Hyperlink reference not
valid.
Donald Trump was the punching bag at Thursday's Fox News GOP debate.
(photo:
Chip Somodevilla/Getty)
http://www.rollingstone.com/politics/news/republican-assault-on-trump
-
may-on
ly-make-him-stronger-20150807http://www.rollingstone.com/politics/new
s
/repub
lican-assault-on-trump-may-only-make-him-stronger-20150807
Republican Assault on Trump May Only Make Him Stronger By Matt
Taibbi, Rolling Stone
08 August 15
Party insiders ganged up on Trump in the first GOP debate, but the
tactic may backfire ast night's debate was the funniest political
program in our nation's history. Nothing really comes close.
There have been moments, obviously. Bush ducking a shoe. Admiral
Stockdale saying "Who am I? Why am I here?" Sarah Palin being
interviewed while a man in the background beheaded turkeys was a classic.
But for comic staying power and sheer WTF factor last night's debate
went beyond 11. By my count there were over a dozen genuine
laugh-out-loud moments. Mike Huckabee bringing pimps into a
presidential debate for the first time ever was a landmark moment.
Jeb Bush's attempt at a one-liner, "They call me Veto Corrleone,"
made millions of adults cringe at the same time. Then there was Megyn
Kelly's brain-busting toss to commercial near the
end:
KELLY: We have to stand you by, because after the break, we're going
to let the candidates make their closing statements, their final
thoughts,
God.not escape.
Is it really possible we made it this far in the television era
without reaching this point: We'll be right back - with God!
God was really the only character missing from that debate last night.
Almost everyone else was there, in the repartee if not in person:
Rosie O'Donnell, LeBron James, Putin, St. Peter, St. Reagan, Siamese
twins, pigs, dogs, slobs, a gay friend of John Kasich, etc. The list
went on and on. It was a real parade of stars.
Of course the main character was Donald Trump, who dominated the
time-of-possession game and spoke nearly 500 words more than the next
closest competitor. In thinking about what actually happened last
night, i.e. what was meaningful as opposed to merely lurid and
entertaining, you have to start with the performance of Trump, who
might just have lured the Republican Party into a trap from which it
will
There was clearly an effort last night by Republican party interestsparty,"
to knock Trump off his frontrunner pedestal. We saw ambush tactics
from the start.
Bret Baier started the whole thing off by asking the candidates to
promise they wouldn't run on a third-party ticket. Trump declined,
highlighting his non-Republican-ness. Megyn Kelly followed up by
asking Trump to defend his record of calling women "fat pigs" and
"disgusting animals" and then made his probable inability to score
female votes in a race against Hillary part of her question.
Later questions targeted Trump's heretical views on abortion and
health care, and his history of donating money to the likes of
Hillary Clinton and Nancy Pelosi.
No other candidate got anything near this kind of treatment in the
debate.
A
more typical question was Baier softballing Mike Huckabee, asking:
"Is the government simply too big for any one person, even a
Republican, to shrink?"
Then there was the postgame show. Fox had pollster Frank Luntz come
on and speak with a "focus group" that expressed concern about the
damage Trump will do to the party. One respondent said Trump was
"splitting the
while another said, "If he runs third party, Republicans lose. Period."Bentsen.
The uninspiring showing in the Luntz group contrasted with some other
post-debate surveys, including one on the Drudge Report showing Trump
as the clear winner of the debate.
That Fox and the other "contestants" onstage were ganging up on Trump
was clear enough, but it hasn't stopped there. Trump is now also
seeing a wave of punditry pieces flowing in from traditional
conservative outlets slamming his campaign. The National Review's
Jonah Goldberg wrote a long piece this month, "Trump fans, it's time
for an intervention."
Stung by Trump's criticism of him as a guy who "couldn't buy a pair
of pants," Goldberg blasted Trump as a grifter and a RINO who is
easier to believe as a "stalking horse for his dear friend Hillary"
than as a Republican nominee.
Meanwhile, Rich Lowry at the Review called the debate a "fabulously
awful"
night for Trump. He slobbered over the rest of the field. He said
Bush "made no mistakes, " Christie was "forceful," Carson was "winsome,"
Kasich "more of a presence than I would have thought," and Huckabee
was "incapable of having a bad debate."
Meanwhile, Fox contributor Charles Krauthammer gleefully declared the
debate to be the "end of Trump," saying that he looked "lost." He's
been an ongoing critic of the Donald, along with other Republican
stalwarts like George Will, who not long ago asked, "If Trump were a
Democratic mole, how would his behavior be any different?"
It's not a mystery why this is happening. Every indicator shows that
if Trump gets the nomination, it will result in a monster wipeout at
the hands of a Democrat like Hillary Clinton. Moreover the
embarrassment of having to throw their weight behind a deranged
narcissist might cripple the party for a generation.
Trump, they surely know, will make Barry Goldwater look like Lloyd
The damage he could do with a full general election season behind theMarxist bondage.
wheel of the Republican brand is almost too awesome to contemplate.
What the Goldbergs and the Wills and Krauthammers of the world
probably don't get is that by singling Trump out for abuse, they're
almost certainly boosting his campaign. First of all, while it might
have looked like a damning image to see Trump alone onstage with his
hand up and refusing to pledge not to run as an Independent, on
another level it was a great Trump moment. As it has been all season,
there was Trump, and everyone else. That scene just made the other
nine guys onstage look like what they are, stooges beholden to their
party and their donors, unable to think for themselves.
The main argument of all of Trump's conservative critics seems to be,
"He's not a real Republican! He'll destroy the party establishment!"
The people making these criticisms seem to assume that conservative
voters will see this as a bad thing.
But there are plenty of Tea Party-type voters out there who hate the
Republican Party establishment almost as much as they hate the Democrats.
There are also plenty of right-wing voters who think George Will and
Charles Krauthammer are smug media weasels only slightly less
disgusting than the Rachel Maddows and Keith Olbermanns of the world.
A know-it-all is a know-it-all.
Trump's followers are a gang of pissed-off nativists who are tired of
being laughed at, belittled, dismissed, and told who to vote for. So
it seems incredible that the Republican establishment thinks it's
going to get rid of Trump by laughing at, belittling and dismissing
him, and telling his voters who they should be picking.
These hysterical critics are making one of the world's most
irredeemable bullies look persecuted and like a victim, a difficult
feat. The desperation to get rid of him may just feed more and more
into the right wing base's crazy victim complex, and in turn get
Trump even more support.
The numbers aren't out yet, but it wouldn't surprise me at all if the
debate last night didn't have exactly the opposite impact that
Krauthammer and Frank Luntz and the rest of those clowns thinks it
had.
Assuming this doesn't all end in Trump becoming president and the
world shortly thereafter ending in nuclear apocalypse, this twist
might end up being the funniest thing to come out of the debate and
the campaign in general.
The Republican party and its allies at Fox, on afternoon radio and in
the blogosphere have spent many years now whipping audiences into
zombie-style bloodlusts. When it suited them, party insiders told
voters across middle America that foreigners were trying to crawl
through their windows to take their wives, and that stuffed suits in
Washington and in the media were conspiring to enslave their children
in
Now all of that paranoia is backing up on them. They created this
monster, and it's coming for them now. Trumpenstein lives. He is
loose in the town and on his way to the doctor's castle. We may not
be laughing two years from now, but for the time being, man, what a show.
http://e-max.it/posizionamento-siti-web/socialize
http://e-max.it/posizionamento-siti-web/socialize
This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software.
www.avast.com
