Russell Brand on why blindly ignoring Fox news is wrong

I hate that both sides are failing to acknowledge that there are problems with the system and "bickering about which propagandist network is the worse isn't going to save an American life, or improve the life of a single American child."

 

As I said, I have no illusions about the reforms I wish the US would adopt

On the other hand, we can keep going with two parties which don't represent most people and are out of touch with the electorate.

Also, Italy uses first past the post (winner take all) instead of the ranked choice voting/instant run-off which is another reform I like. I am in favour of proportional representation and run off elections/ranked choice voting.

As the mans says: "democracy needs policies. And it needs effective policies."

Not the "partisan" bullshit that is going on the the US.

How the bloodless revolution will happen in the United States

The United State is locked in partisan nonsense and needs to get parties which actually represent the people. The only way that will happen is on a local basis, where the duopoly have less control. The non-duopoly parties begin to "infect" the legislature, which is where the real change comes. 

 I was pleasantly surprised when Doggone told me that Antonin Scalia agreed with me about the parliamentary system. 

I don't like it because of Westminster. I like it because the power is where it belongs: in the lesiglature. Additionally, because of that, there is an absolute necessity for political cooperation. One needs to come up with a consensus for a parliamentary system to work. The government literally falls if there can't be a consensus, which is why it is necessary. A lower house of parliament with an ability to dismiss a government by "withholding (or blocking) supply" (rejecting a budget), passing a motion of no confidence, or defeating a confidence motion.

Loss of supply occurs where a government in a parliamentary democracy using the Westminster System or a system derived from it is denied a supply of treasury or exchequer funds, by whichever house or houses of parliament or head of state is constitutionally entitled to grant and deny supply. A defeat on a budgetary vote is one way by which supply can be denied. Loss of supply is typically interpreted as indicating a loss of confidence in the government. Not all "money bills" are necessarily supply bills. For instance, in Australia, supply bills are defined as "bills which are required by the Government to carry on its day-to-day business".^[1]

When a loss of supply occurs, a prime minister is generally required either by constitutional convention or by explicit constitutional instruction to either resign immediately or seek a parliamentary dissolution.

Some constitutions, however, do not allow the option of parliamentary dissolution but rather require the government to be dissolved or to resign.

Given how many budget crises happen in the US, it would probably go through governments like Italy or Belgium until the teething period was over. On the other hand, digging in on the budget would make it clear where the real power lies in government.

The presence of third parties would ensure that there was a way to gain consensus, or withhold it to bring the government more in line with the will of the people. There's a reason why the duopoly do everything they can to keep the power to themselves.

I don't have any illusions about some of the reforms which would be nice to see in US politics since Europe has them and people like Marine Le Pen are prominent in politics. On the other hand, there is a far better representation of political viewpoints in Europe than the One Party-Duopoly United States.

There's a reason I don't like discussing politics with Americans: they are worse than people who lived behind the Iron Curtain in how badly they are propagandised.

There needs to be a real free market of ideas, which isn't happening in the US.

GOP = Nasty mix of HYPOCRISY and INTIMIDATION, topped with LIE sprinkles

Two stories come together that represent the worst of hypocrisy and partisan intimidation, combined with the typical stupidity of people in southern states in voting against their own self-interests and the local, state and national interest in favor of special interests and the worst of partisan games.

The two stories: Joe-Not-My-Name-Not-a-Real-Plumber Sam Wurzelbacher is now working a union job at Chrysler.  He claims he now doesn't REALLY hate unions, he LIKES the UAW, the unions he hates are just PUBLIC Unions.   The difference is there is no difference, but hey -- conservatives don't mix well with facts.  Apparently ol' Sammy-Joe thinks the private unions are great, NOW.  Of course, like a true conservative, he's obsessed with homophobia and whining about what a victim he is.  (For the record, once and for all -- 'tea bagger' is not a gay slur, unless the person making it is a homophobe.) The other story that relates to this is, of course, the intimidation by Republicans of the VW plant workers in Chattanooga, Tennessee.

He conspicuously forgot to mention that union attitude, over and over and over and over in the past.

Joe/Sam announced his new job:

Wurzelbacher wrote, “I was just recently hired on at Chrysler. Can a conservative work safely and soundly in a union environment – in a shop filled with union workers, activists, voters and life-long supporters of the Democrat Party? You betcha. Yes, I have a website that puts out conservative news. Yes, I am part owner of a gun company. Yes, I’m a Republican who was cast into the limelight for having the temerity to confront Barack Obama on the question of redistributing wealth… But I’m a working man and I’m working.”

"Temerity", Joe? No, there was no temerity; you just demonstrated you had a poor grasp of the facts of the ACA and of the real nature of redistributing wealth, and that IGNORANCE was seized upon by the radical right, who then exploited and used you.

Let the whining begin:

"I had three days of orientation, and now I’m “on the job” over here at Chrysler and on Day 4, I’m outside on a break smoking a cigarette and right on cue – some guy calls me a “teabagger.

Now, I would be remiss if I didn’t mention that Democrats and liberals, who are supposed to so tolerant and enlightened regarding homosexuals have for three or four years now, have been using a gay slur to describe people who they think are associated with the Tea Party. “Tea Bagger” has traditionally been a derogatory slur used to intimidate, put down, humiliate and otherwise taunt, smear, bully or just discriminate against gays – usually gay men – based on a sex act that gay men apparently made popular.

Decorum prevents me from describing it – they got this thing called “Google” now for that – but suffice it to say that the double-standard for what Democrats can say and what conservatives can say continues unabated, but still I thought to myself, did this guy think I’m gay, or was he making a statement of my political affiliation?

Joe, are you that stupid, and that much a prude, that you REALLY believe teabagger is a homophobic slur? You must have gotten that idea from your homophobic culture-war-waging CONSERVATIVE friends.  It's a pretty safe bet that the term was used to reference your political bent, not how your sexuality is bent; but if you aren't sure, why don't you ASK?  I think you don't ask, because you already know, and you are engaging in the typical conservative whine-fest, looking for a fake excuse to claim to be a victim, AGAIN.  You might want to rethink that; I don't see making that kind of fake claim endearing you to your new co-workers, on the basis of misrepresenting the exchange and them in a presumably public forum.  Among other objections Joe, it smacks of YOU being a homophobe, what with homophobe and teabagger being pretty much synonymous.  It's not like Joe/Sam hasn't raucously exchanged the vulgar slang term 'C*ck-s*ck*er' before in conversation, so it is overstretching credulity to assert this new delicacy relating to crude oral sex references.

We go from the individual auto worker / radical right wing hack to the group-think radical right wing hacks, with a huge propaganda launch by them to mislead and intimidate union membership in Tennessee.
This story is just one of those which smacks of the fact-deficient and emotional appeal of propaganda to mislead and deceive.

From the Tennessean:  TN taxpayers subsidize UAW outrage at VW plant

When Volkswagen Chattanooga opened its doors in 2011, it did so with generous help from the Tennessee taxpayer.
In fact, the more than a half-billion dollars in subsidies that the company received to come to Tennessee amounted to the “richest incentive package — and perhaps the most government assistance and tax breaks ever for an American automobile plant,” according to the Chattanooga Times Free Press.
And here is what the taxpayers of Tennessee are getting for their money: The United Auto Workers, a hard left political organization that bankrupted General Motors and spends millions to elect liberal politicians, has been given full access to the Chattanooga facility.

Sticking a wrench in the spin here,when Republicans spend a heaping helping of tax dollars to bring in the auto plant, without unions, to enhance getting Republicans elected, that's ok.  The claims of the UAW bankrupting General Motors or any of the other auto manufacturers is bogus; it was poor management decision making, as we see from the new rebirth of the auto industry, with help from Democrats - and unions.  The spin continues at a high RPM:

Union officials, including Region 8 Director Gary Casteel, have been granted office space in the plant to better force-feed his union’s propaganda to the workers (who were not given the opportunity to ask questions in return, according to sources). And UAW troops sporting shirts emblazoned with the union logo have been roaming the production lines, intimidating workers who are just trying to do their jobs.
And here is what else is going on in the tax-subsidized VW plant: Workers who have requested equal access to those facilities to talk about alternatives to UAW representation have been denied permission to do so by Sebastian Patta, Volkswagen vice president of human resources at Chattanooga.
Back in Germany, the Volkswagen Works Council is controlled by IG Metall, a powerful union that is allied with the UAW and has strongly urged Chattanooga workers to accept UAW representation.

There are no credible reports of any kind of intimidation.  Identifying someone as a representative of a union available to answer questions is not intimidation -- unless you want to get into the potential for wearing a t-shirt to represent intimidation, including some of the more hateful conservative mottos and logs as such.

Unless another entity has some kind of official standing in organization of workers, there is no legitimate reason for a VW plant to give anyone else an office.  OR does anyone else think that a plant should not have some directorial control over their office space allottment?

And now we are to believe that the poor dumb people of Tennessee, especially the ignorant residents and representatives of Chattanooga are just finding out NOW about VW's relationship with unions?  It's never been a secret, at any time, to anyone who did even minimal homework on VW or German labor practices for that matter.  And here's the big news bomb--- IT MAKES THEM MORE COMPETITIVE AS MANUFACTURERS! IT WORKS, REALLY REALLY WELL FOR BOTH THE COMPANY AND THE WORKERS AND EVEN THE NATION OF GERMANY.

The propaganda disinformation continues:

Would the state of Tennessee or the city of Chattanooga have given so much so willingly to Volkswagen had they known the UAW was part of the deal? Doubt it. Here’s why:
At the time Volkswagen was breaking ground in 2009, the UAW was part owner of General Motors, having been given one-sixth of the company during the auto bailout. GM is a competitor of Volkswagen. Then there’s the UAW political agenda. This union is bad for business and bad for politics. And no one in Tennessee was told that this union poison was going to be poured into the economic pool.
Let’s be clear about what’s happening in Chattanooga. Upper management is conspiring with the union to give it every advantage in the coming election, while doing everything it can to shut down dissenting voices. Sources tell the Center for Worker Freedom that plant supervisors who oppose the union are afraid to speak out for fear of their jobs. Sources also tell us that workers feel they are under “lockdown” while they are on the job, as union troops patrol the production lines in a classic projection of power and intimidation.

Unions probably ARE bad for the kind of partisan politics that the radical right likes to engage in, including the radical redistribution of wealth from the middle class to the 1%. But Unions are not bad for business and they are not bad for government. The only people pushing fear and lies are from the right. You know -- like Sam/Joe the not-a-plumber. Same whine, same lies, just on a larger group level further south, where the ignorance grows tall and wide.

Both stories are about one thing, and one thing only - lies and distortion to generate fear, and highly partisan politics at the expense of the average citizen who works hard.

The Brilliant STrib Cartoonist, Steve Sack hits two more out of the park

This home grown Minnesota cartoonist is the best kind of locally grown genius.

These are two of my favorites of his recent work.

Personally, I'd like to see both parties - BOTH PARTIES - refuse to give a party endorsement to any candidate who does not genuinely live in the district where the candidate is running.  I don't care what state office, what federal office, even what county or local office.

If the conservatives are going to try to penalize and make voting more difficult by forcing voters to prove where they live, and that they are legal to vote there, shouldn't they be just as insistent about where their candidates live and that they represent those voters, including LIVING THERE?  Otherwise, I think it is legitimate to challenge that the candidates genuinely and fully represent those voters.

It is worth noting that the REPUBLICAN Secretary of State of Indiana violated this law in that state, and was subsequently convicted of voter fraud, perjury and theft, despite the state having enacted a very restrictive voter ID law.

If there was ever any proof that voter ID doesn't prevent voter fraud, that is the classic, strongest possible example.



and this one!
 
 When I volunteered to help candidates in the 2010 election races, going door to door was a big part of that campaigning.  It is equally a big part of people distributing informative material (and sometimes disinformative material), but also where candidates introduce themselves, and one way for polls to be conducted.  Like the Census takers, delivery people, service people from utilities, there are lots of people who may make an unscheduled visit for legitimate reasons to a person's doorstep.

The shoot first law makes it legal for a person to shoot based on their feelings, right or wrong, instead of them being required to do so on the basis of objective fact, objective threat not 'feelings, nothing more than Feeeeeeeeeeeeeeelings'.

Well done Steve!  Well done STrib!