Is it wrong of me to confess that I have enjoyed the countless articles reliving the shock and horror of the election, with everyone recalling exactly when they became personally aware that the Clinton campaign bus had stalled on the tracks with the Trump train bearing down on it at full speed?
The first question in the title isn’t all that difficult to suss out. The weft in both men’s narrative tapestry was that neither was beholden to Big Money, one because he was too rich to be bought off and the other because he was too ethical. One touted using his own money and the other touted using only small donor money.
Quite honestly, at this point, the Democrats have nothing left to lose. Given that fact, you would think that a Party in such extremis would finally throw caution to the winds and take out the desiccated and expired metaphorical gunpowder they have been saving lo these many years in coffee cans in their backyards.
Jimmy gets a tad excited on this one (warning: generous use of the F-Bomb). He talks about: What the Dems learned from the election (hint: Effing Nothing!!); Dems picking Wall Street Whore Chuck Schumer to lead the Senate Dems; And gets on Bernie's case for going along with the whole charade.
I read Ryan Cooper's article 2009: The year the Democratic Party died and I was awash in a melancholy nostalgia, not the happy kind of nostalgia of first puppies, high school proms, big promotion, etc. but the kind of reminiscence of the sort prompted by your doctor asking "when did you first notice this?"When did you get the first awful twinge that all may not be as you hoped?
So I'm picking over the carcass of my comment history over at TOP, which died last May when I finally bailed for the season.
I noticed a diary I had commented effusively about on May 22, titled "Hillary's problem with Independents".
Now wouldn't that be a very intriguing read now 6 months later? Why was I so enthusiastic about this diary? I bet there are some prognostications in there that would be helpful in our moment of deep introspection, right?
One small step for integrity, one giant leap for the DNC.
http://www.politico.com/story/2016/08/dnc-ceo-resigns-amid-turmoil-226570
About friggin' time. Of course, they'll probably just be replaced by more able and subtle corporate DNC shills, but maybe Tulsi gets in there. Donna Brazille is a step up from DWS, though a small one.
It comes to me at moments when the anger begins to reach a tipping point. Election "irregularities", Media Collusion, Federal Appointments to Donors. The Lies, The Hubris, The Corruption, and the impunity with which they do all these things
A fantasy of revenge against those who have acted in bad faith and have suborned our democracy. This would include donors, the media, the DNC, the campaign, and the candidate.
Am I leaving anyone out?
