Moral Marianne Williamson: End The $26 Billion In Subsidies To Fossil Fuel Industry.

[PoliTalker]

Hello Flash,

I generally agree but I don't think we are as helpless as your description. Members spend much more time today in their district and meet with groups often and hold town hall meetings. Also, tourists and groups in D. C. regularly get meetings with their rep even if they did not give money. Even when members are fund raising they often do it through small meetings in people's homes which gives you a chance to talk with them without giving money.

After all, personal contact is the best way to win votes and meeting constituents wins more votes than money (it just doesn't reach nearly as many people). I have been to D. C. as a tourist and met with my Senator in his office, got a pass for a White House tour from my rep, and got a tour of the capital from my rep. They control the tours so you have to go to them.

I disagree about the advantage it gives to the rich because candidates don't usually spend their own money so being rich is not necessary. Also, there are many examples of very rich people who spent millions of their own funds and did very poorly. President Obama raised a lot of money on the internet through relatively small contributions--so millions from a lot of people is just as good as millions for wealthy donors.

Losers often say they lost because they had no funds, but funds go to those who have support. They don't have support because they spent money.

I'm glad you agree we should have better communication with our Representatives, and that it is not in our best interest that they spend most of their efforts as elected officials trying to get reelected.

Most people cannot afford to go to DC to get a tour with their Rep.

And yes, the rich do have more power because the money the Reps are spending to get reelected more often comes from rich corporations than individuals.

[Buck Tucker]

Perhaps that is true, but then you have ppl like epstein & nuts that wanna murder lots of ppl....

I think you know full well that I'm talking about economic freedom, to do what you want, work where and live where you want, buy the things you want and not be forced into some Utopian Dream of some Leftist Mastermind. Liberty and freedom have nothing to do with Child Molesters and mass killers.

[Bill]

I think you know full well that I'm talking about economic freedom, to do what you want, work where and live where you want, buy the things you want and not be forced into some Utopian Dream of some Leftist Mastermind. Liberty and freedom have nothing to do with Child Molesters and mass killers.

Really, do I know you from somewhere???

You got my answer...

[Buck Tucker]

Really, do I know you from somewhere???

You got my answer...

I doubt if you know me. But I can tell by your sig you're a leftist. You fall into the Fatal Conceit of the Socialist Mindset. Socialists, says National Review correspondent Kevin Williamson, are guilty of a fatal conceit: They think they can develop a system so powerful that it can consider every variable in society and propose scientific answers “about how many acres of potatoes to plant, and when and where to plant them.”

The great Economist FA Hayek wrote a book called "Fatal Conceit, the Errors of Socialism." The biggest error of Socialism is that it is based on the assumption that we already know everything we need to know in order to plan our future. As in the number of acres of potatoes to plant. And this leads to tyranny, it crushes creativity. This is why the European socialist countries never matched the economic growth of the US.

Socialism leads to stagnation like the 8 years of Obama. He said 2% growth or less was the new normal and higher growth was "not possible."



Still think you know me?

[Bill]

[Minister of Truth]

Hello HTD,



Hillary's not running.

Has anyone currently running contradicted her yet?

Also, you voted for her. After she said it.

[PoliTalker]

Hello Howard the Duck,

Has anyone currently running contradicted her yet?

Also, you voted for her. After she said it.

Klassic Whataboutism.

Here we are in 2019, in a thread about 2020 candidate Marianne Williamson, and all you can comment on is 2016 candidate Hillary Clinton.

The two women could hardly be more unlike one another. Different times. Different people.

I don't understand this need, this focus, on irrelevance.

Does a self-made modern moving woman with a stirring message pose that much of a threat to male fragility?

[Earl]

Hello Howard the Duck,



Klassic Whataboutism.

Here we are in 2019, in a thread about 2020 candidate Marianne Williamson, and all you can comment on is 2016 candidate Hillary Clinton.

The two women could hardly be more unlike one another. Different times. Different people.

I don't understand this need, this focus, on irrelevance.

Does a self-made modern moving woman with a stirring message pose that much of a threat to male fragility?

No, Snowflake, you are not a threat to male fragility.

[Bill]

No, Snowflake, you are not a threat to male fragility.

Po' earl, tossing out some personal insults before getting ready for church..

[PoliTalker]

Interesting and short video:

Now Is Our Time

[PoliTalker]

Willamson reaches the 130,000 individual donor benchmark for qualifying for the Sept Debates!

Marianne Williamson

[PoliTalker]

Marianne Williamson releases her plan for The Department of Peace:

"U. S. Department of Peace Specifics
Domestically, the U.S. Department of Peace will work to:

Provide much-needed assistance to efforts by city, county, and state governments in coordinating existing programs; as well as develop new programs based on best practices nationally
Teach violence prevention and conflict resolution to America’s school children
Effectively treat and dismantle gang psychology
Reform our criminal justice system towards a focus on restorative and healing oriented approaches rather than punitive alone
Reshape our prison system by addressing racial inequalities and recidivism
Rehabilitate the prison population
Foster strategies to eliminate the school-to-prison pipeline
Build peace-making efforts among conflicting cultures both here and abroad
Work with local and state governments to help change police culture and the way that police work with our communities, with the goal of fostering improved relations.
Work with local and state governments to lessen gun violence on a national level.
Examine how elements of our food supply affect our behaviors.
Address factors such as drug and alcohol abuse, mistreatment of the elderly, and much more.

Internationally, the U.S. Department of Peace will focus on the following areas among others:

Provide peace-building support to assist governments and communities in attempts to end conflicts, instead of providing military aid which often prolongs conflicts
Provide and help coordinate humanitarian assistance around the world to help people and governments get out of their current crises, and have a chance to build peaceful lives in the future.
Humanitarian assistance may include aid for things like food security, health care, education, women, children and a variety of other types of aid
Provide community building and rebuilding assistance to aid people and countries in creating a more sustainable, peaceful culture that will help to prevent future conflicts.
Support our military with complementary approaches to peacebuilding.
Create and administer a U.S. Peace Academy, acting as a sister organization to the U.S. Military Academy.
The Secretary of the Department of Peace, and the department, will advise the Secretaries of Defense and State on matters related to national security, and will coordinate peacemaking efforts across these departments."

Department of Peace plan

[PoliTalker]

Darn it!

She just keeps making sense:

"What would our economic policies be if our goal was to help people thrive?
Would they not promote universal access to opportunity?

What would our education policies be if our goal was to help people thrive?
Wouldn’t every school in America be a palace of learning, and culture and the arts?

What would our healthcare system be if our goal was to help people thrive?
Would we not want every person in America to have free healthcare?

What would our national security agenda be if our goal was to help people thrive?
Would we not recognize the amelioration of unnecessary human suffering as a national security risk?

What would our environmental policies look like if our goal was to help people thrive?
Wouldn’t the reversal of climate change, clean water and air, and uncontaminated food and earth by our top priorities?

Many would say that achieving such things will take time. But I wonder how much time they think we have before the chaos already created by a dysfunctional political system overwhelms us.

Building public policy around the notion of helping people thrive should not sound odd; it simply sounds that way in contrast to the way we do things now. In fact, it is the most American thing in the world to dream big.

This is not a time in our history to simply make things "okay." This is the time in our history to make things extraordinary. It says a lot about how far we have fallen, when striving for real greatness sounds like such an outrageous idea.

Let us strive for real greatness, and strive together. This is the place. This is the time. And we are the people."

Well, what can I say? If she keeps making sense like that no way she's going to become OUR leader. We are not receptive to such logic.

[Earl]

Darn it!

She just keeps making sense:

"What would our economic policies be if our goal was to help people thrive?
Would they not promote universal access to opportunity?

What would our education policies be if our goal was to help people thrive?
Wouldn’t every school in America be a palace of learning, and culture and the arts?

What would our healthcare system be if our goal was to help people thrive?
Would we not want every person in America to have free healthcare?

What would our national security agenda be if our goal was to help people thrive?
Would we not recognize the amelioration of unnecessary human suffering as a national security risk?

What would our environmental policies look like if our goal was to help people thrive?
Wouldn’t the reversal of climate change, clean water and air, and uncontaminated food and earth by our top priorities?

Many would say that achieving such things will take time. But I wonder how much time they think we have before the chaos already created by a dysfunctional political system overwhelms us.

Building public policy around the notion of helping people thrive should not sound odd; it simply sounds that way in contrast to the way we do things now. In fact, it is the most American thing in the world to dream big.

This is not a time in our history to simply make things "okay." This is the time in our history to make things extraordinary. It says a lot about how far we have fallen, when striving for real greatness sounds like such an outrageous idea.

Let us strive for real greatness, and strive together. This is the place. This is the time. And we are the people."

Well, what can I say? If she keeps making sense like that no way she's going to become OUR leader. We are not receptive to such logic.

The amelioration of unnecessary human suffering is determined by the effort of each individual for himself and his family. It is not my responsibility to alleviate your suffering. It's your responsibility.

Private charity addresses human suffering, not government.

[Earl]

Po' earl, tossing out some personal insults before getting ready for church..

We go to Mass on Saturday, Billy.

"Earl" is a proper noun and requires the upper case.

Try to do better.