● NYC, You've Failed Us!

#‎nyPrimary

NYC, You've Failed Us!

New York City, you’ve disappointed your own state and the nation, if not the world. Now, the cities in New York state are more conservative and less informed than the rest of the state? New York City, Buffalo, Syracuse, and Rochester failed Tuesday.

Hillary is the most hawkish candidate, even more than Trump or Cruz. Her record is clear. She is a warmongering corporate politician who is against progressive policies. You can’t both claim to be liberal and simultaneously support Hillary. Yes, she can be effective and get the job done for her donors, but not for the public.

Throughout her career she has been wrong. While Bernie marched with Martin Luther King Jr., she campaigned for Goldwater. She has campaigned for some of the worst policy decisions since Jim Crow. From mass incarceration, the Patriot Act, the Iraq War, to NAFTA, she has been wrong and behind. She only came out for gay marriage after it became embarrassing for her not to. She has been wrong or behind on the issues throughout her career. She’s not a leader.

All the polls show Bernie as being more electable nationally. So, even in terms of strategy, it’s a fail.

Sure, voting for Hillary is understandable when you have no other choice. But, this time we had another choice, and we failed.

New York Primary Results http://nytimes.com/elections/results/new-york
How Every New York City Neighborhood Voted in the Democratic Primary http://nytimes.com/interactive/2016/04/19/us/elections/new-york-city-democratic-primary-results.html

   Draw The Line in 2016
   Between Public & Private Representatives

 

[BLOG HOME]

● Love Transcends Hate

● Love exceeds . . . 
● Love surpasses . . .
● Love outshines . . .
Love Conquers Hate ---◘
Rosario Dawson : Why She Supports Bernie Sanders ◘ http://youtu.be/4gpCUBvB_qs ◘
Love Transcends Hate ---◘
It’s too soon to give up.
If Sanders takes New York on the 19th, he will probably be our next president. And then, real reform will be possible.
Bernie Sanders has been right for decades. 
Hillary has been a Corporatist for decades. Both of their records are clear.
From the crime bill to welfare reform, Hillary Clinton devastated black America.

“In her support for the 1994 crime bill, for example, she used racially coded rhetoric to cast black children as animals. ‘They are not just gangs of kids anymore,’ she said. ‘They are often the kinds of kids that are called super-predators. No conscience, no empathy. We can talk about why they ended up that way, but first we have to bring them to heel.’ ”¹ The Nation http://thenation.com/article/hillary-clinton-does-not-deserve-black-peoples-votes

Draw The Line in 2016
Between Public & Private Representatives

  ^{- - -} 
Draw the line between elected officials who represent private corporations, and our public representatives who actually represent the public. Bernie Sanders & Jill Stein are not afraid to stand up to big multinational corporations and hold them accountable, in favor of human rights. Both, Bernie Sanders and Jill Stein have demonstrated that they can't be bought, and will not be bought by corporate interests. Hillary & the Republicans are already corporate bought! That’s why it’s imperative that Democrats vote for Bernie Sanders in the Primaries. Let the Democrats in Washington know that there will be no vote for corporate interests in 2016. The Choice will be between Bernie Sanders of the Democrats or Jill Stein of the Green Party.

Draw The Line in 2016 ✄--- uResist.org/vote/2016 --- ✔ Make this Election about public rather than private interests, with democratic-socialism. 

Love exceeds, surpasses, outshines,
  . . . Love Transcends Hate!
Bernie http://democracynow.org/search?utf8=%E2%9C%93&query=Bernie+Sanders
2016 Primary Schedule http://uspresidentialelectionnews.com/2016-presidential-primary-schedule-calendar

● 2016 Primaries
● 2016 Election
● Bernie Sanders
● Jill Stein

[BLOG HOME]

● Draw The Line

● Draw The Line
● Throw Your Vote

2016: The Line ---◘
Bernie Sanders Tells the Truth ◘ http://youtu.be/rtBVuye4fZQ ◘

Don’t throw your vote away. Many people say that when you vote for a 3rd party, you are throwing your vote away. But, it can also be argued, that when you vote for someone you don’t really believe in, you’re throwing your vote away. In other words, voting for the lesser evil, is still a vote against your own interests. When an election has a low turnout, people sometimes imply that voters are making a statement, by not voting. But, that’s exactly what big business wants. Polls show, that the more people vote, the more progressive the outcome. So, when people don’t vote, they’re unwittingly yielding to corporate interests. If you vote for the lesser evil, or decline your vote, you are actually being manipulated by the 1%. One way of looking at it, is that the only way to completely throw your vote away, is to not vote. Just think, if everyone who didn’t vote in 2000 (because they were fed up with the two party system), voted for Ralph Nader of the Green Party. What would've happened? Bush still would’ve won, but the Green Party would be a viable party today. We would have a three party system by now, and that would be a major accomplishment! That would be a far greater accomplishment, than electing the Wall Street Corporate Drone Captain/Deporter in Chief, Barack Obama.

2016 Primary Schedule http://uspresidentialelectionnews.com/2016-presidential-primary-schedule-calendar

Both corporate parties keep moving to the right. So, we have to draw the line somewhere. We can draw the line between elected officials who represent private corporations, and our public representatives who actually represent the public. Bernie Sanders & Jill Stein are not afraid to stand up to big multinational corporations and hold them accountable, in favor of human rights. Both, Bernie Sanders and Jill Stein have demonstrated that they can't be bought, and will not be bought by corporate interests. Hillary & the Republicans are already corporate bought! That’s why it’s imperative that Democrats vote for Bernie Sanders in the Primaries. Let the Democrats in Washington know, early on, that there will be no vote (for Hillary) for corporate interests in 2016. The Choice will be between Bernie Sanders of the Democrats or Jill Stein of the Green Party.

Draw The Line in 2016 ✄--- uResist.org/vote/2016 --- ✔ Make this Election about public rather than private interests, with democratic-socialism.

● 2016 Primaries
● 2016 Election
● Bernie Sanders
● Jill Stein

[BLOG HOME]

● conservatism

[SITE MENU] [BLOG HOME]

CONSERVATIVE VIEWPOINT
. . .

"That which is public is socialist, and therefore, evil."

The way to keep power and money in check, is to have a working free press continually keep the pressure on, by asking the tough questions and insisting on accountability.

INTRODUCTION:

conservative |kənˈsərvətiv; -vəˌtiv|
adjective
holding to traditional attitudes and values and cautious about change or innovation, typically in relation to politics or religion.

• Unadventurous, especially in terms of culture, tradition, politics, philosophy, thinking, and the creative arts : No Risk & No Reward.
• (of dress or taste) sober and conventional : a conservative suit.
• reactionary, traditionalist, orthodox, old-fashioned, set in one's way.
• tending or disposed to maintain existing views, conditions, or institutions : conventional and narrow-minded.
• marked by moderation or caution (a low estimate)

noun
a person who is averse to change and holds to traditional values and attitudes, typically in relation to politics.

• advocating support of established institutions
• a supporter or member of the Republican Party in the U.S.A. or a similar party in another country.
• (public opinion) liberals and conservatives have found common ground in support of a public healthcare plan.
• (government policy) liberals and conservatives have found common ground in support of private industry.

DERIVATIVES
conservatism |kənˈsərvəˌtizəm| noun : (from Latin: conservare = "save" or "preserve") refers to various political and social philosophies that support tradition and the status quo.

conservatively adverb
conservativeness noun

ORIGIN late Middle English (in the sense [aiming to preserve] ): from late Latin conservativus, from conservat- ‘conserved,’ from the verb conservare (see conserve ). Current senses date from the mid 19th century onward.
-

Cultural conservatism

Cultural conservatism is a philosophy that supports preservation of the heritage of a nation or culture: jingoistic or jingoism.
In the subset social conservatism, the norms may also be what is viewed as a question of morality. In some cultures, practices such as homosexuality are seen as immoral. In others, it is considered immoral for a woman to reveal too much of her body. The economic, political, religious, cultural, and social oppression of others is not only seen as legitimate, but as admirable and moral.


Religious conservatism

Religious conservatives seek to apply the teachings of particular ideologies to politics, sometimes by proclaiming the value of those teachings, at other times seeking to have those teachings influence laws. Religious conservatism may support, or be supported by, secular customs. In other places or at other times, religious conservatism may find itself at odds with the culture in which the believers reside. In some cultures, there is conflict between two or more different groups of religious conservatives, each claiming both that their view is correct, and that opposing views are wrong.

Because many religions preserve a founding text, or at least a set of well-established traditions, the possibility of radical religious conservatism arises. These are radical both in the sense of abolishing the status quo and of a perceived return to the root of a belief. They are ante conservative in their claim to be preserving the belief in its original or pristine form. Radical religious conservatism generally sees the status quo as corrupted by abuses, corruption, or heresy. The evolution of a society (such as openness, sexual awareness, tolerance and appreciation for others, and diversity of almost any kind) can trigger a violent cultural collision with conservatives.

. . .

CONSERVATIVE VIEWPOINT

The way to keep power and money in check (to keep them from taking your money, time, and rights) is to have a working free press continually keep the pressure on, by asking the tough questions and insisting on accountability.

Many conservatives have the opinion that reporters are annoying. This would make sense if they (conservatives) were big business owners engaging in questionable activities. Unfortunately, most conservatives (small-town school teachers, small business owners, middle class, and poor alike) have this opinion about journalists who question the business practices of the rich and those in power who benefit from or support their actions. Many have the impression that the press is socialist, intellectual snobbery that's trying to destroy America, and that the wealthy business owners are the victims of free speech gone mad. These average americas (middle class and working poor) who have fallen prey to corporate propaganda don't even realize that they need their civil liberties, let alone how their very freedom depends on these "annoying" reporters keeping power in check.

Conservatives will always see the press as liberal, because conservatism is all about conforming to the power structure (the Establishment). The US, and now the world, is ruled by corporations, and these corporations, by their very nature, are right-wing institutions. When people conform, they don't conform to the disenfranchised, they take the easy safe road and conform to the authorities, and the "authorities" in the US, answer to the real authorities, the business leaders and multinational private bankers. Even the Fed is a private bank, owned by individuals, not the public. The word "Federal" in the Federal Reserve is intentionally deceiving. There is a Federal Board appointed by the President, named by the bank owners, to oversee the bank's operations, but the owners (as in any business) have the most power. It's always a power struggle between business leaders, the 3 branches of government, and the citizenry. The citizens usually lose, having less money and power (and hence, influence), because many of them (conservatives) have been convinced that they don't really need their rights, and should do little to help the poor (to level the playing field), but instead, should give to the top, only to ensure that the divid between rich and poor ever widens.

Big business owners are right-wing because that's how they make their living, through private industry. Government officials are right-wing (even the democrats) for campaign contributions from private industry. The media is right-wing because the media are corporations, which inherently have right-wing (corporate or private) interests. Conservatives are right-wing, because their need to conform overrides their need to seek the truth. Honestly seeking the truth is too risky for them because it could mean going against the opinions of their family, church, and/or tradition. And, this goes against their priority of putting jingoistic loyalty over honest analysis and self-reflection. They choose their team and fall inline, and defend their team regardless of the facts, or even unwittingly, their own interests.

You will never (or very rarely) hear that "the media is conservative" within the corporate media, because this is an unacceptable opinion within right-wing institutions. Most of the complaining about the media, within the media, comes from the right, because (obviously) the media is on the right, hence the popular phrase "the liberal media." Once you're convinced that the media has a liberal bias you won't even consider opinions that are outside the mainstream and to the left of the corporate media. This is intentional, because it keeps the public from asking the real questions about our institutions. Also, people have a hard time believing that so many could be deceived (especially themselves) even though it has happened to practically every society throughout history. If you believe that the media is liberal, you then might turn to right-wing talk radio and fall into the abyss of lies that plague this nation.

All one has to do is look at the past 30 some years of deregulation and realize what that means: we are moving to the right. Even the democrats (the "left-wing/liberal" party) caves to corporate interests over public interests almost every time. This is the definition of being right-wing, and a realization that we have no viable left-wing political party in the US. In a time when a so-called "socialist" leader can't even pass a Public Health Care Plan, because private insurance companies have too much power and influence, even though the majority of the public wants health care for all, we can see how this trend of moving to the right could play out. If everything public is deemed as ineffective "evil" socialism, we could eventually lose our post office, parks, public libraries, and even our public schools. And with the rise of the unaccountable corporate militaries, a frightening future may await. Once you realize the corporate media is right-wing, you might move to the left to find the truth. You might actually read or listen to Naomi Klein, Howard Zinn, Jeremy Scahill, Amy Goodman, Ralph Nader, Jeremy Rifkin, and Noam Chomsky, people who actually support their arguments with facts.

...read more

[BLOG HOME] [SITE MENU]