---------- Forwarded message ----------
From: Miriam Vieni <miriamvieni@optonline.net>
Date: Sat, 30 Mar 2019 22:01:09 -0400
Subject: [blind-democracy] Re: Donald Trump
To: blind-democracy@freelists.org
There's a segment from The Real News in which Peter Cuznick describes
the interaction between FDR and Stalin during the Yalta Conference and
how Truman changed everything and turned, what could have been a
cooperative relationship between Russia and the US, into the cold war.
And it's also probably in the books that he and Oliver Stone have on
Bookshare. I listened to this little tidbit the other day and it made
me ill.
Miriam
-----Original Message-----
From: blind-democracy-bounce@freelists.org
<blind-democracy-bounce@freelists.org> On Behalf Of Carl Jarvis
Sent: Saturday, March 30, 2019 5:56 PM
To: blind-democracy@freelists.org
Subject: [blind-democracy] Re: Donald Trump
I was ten years old when the Second World War ended. My dad had taken
me to several newsreels showing battle scenes during the war. The
last newsreel we saw showed the American troops and the Russian troops
joining together after having driven back the German troops. They
laughed and slapped one another on the backs, and the Russians grabbed
the heads of Americans and kissed them on both cheeks. It was
wonderful for this ten year old boy to see. World War turned into
World Peace. But the year was not over before I heard on the radio
how Joseph Stalin had tricked Roosevelt and Churchill, and how we
Peace Loving Americans couldn't trust those cheating, back stabbing
Commies. And the same people who I'd seen weeping and laughing along
with me, as the American troops and the Russian troops hugged and
kissed, now snarled and cursed those Russians. That was when I
learned the meaning of the expression, fickle minded.
Of course we never sat in class and compared the American Constitution
with the Constitution of the Soviet Union. We just took the honest,
trustworthy word of our Leaders. They were all honest people,
untouched by the money of the Ruling Class.
We knew this because they told us so. And now only the names have
been changed to introduce the latest pack of crooks.
I actually still blush when some of our American political leaders go
off on Russia or China for doing exactly what our nation is doing. It
gives new meaning to the word, Sellout!
Carl Jarvis
On 3/30/19, Miriam Vieni <miriamvieni@optonline.net> wrote:
> I never learned anything about the Russian constitution, and I'm sure
> that no one else living in the western world did either. One would
> have had to seek out that information, and it wouldn't have been all
> that easy for most people to do so, before the internet. And if you
> weren't around in 1946 to watch how our government was able to
> demonize the Russian government and its people in the minds of
> Americans, you can see a replay of it right now, starting in 2013 and
> escalating after the presidential election. And although Obama was no
> Stalin, I watched how people blinded themselves to his faults and made
> excuses for him from the day he was elected. I remember having a
> discussion with Joe on the phone, about him back then. Joe was doing what every other Democrat was doing, making excuses for him.
>
> Miriam
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: blind-democracy-bounce@freelists.org
> <blind-democracy-bounce@freelists.org> On Behalf Of Carl Jarvis
> Sent: Saturday, March 30, 2019 12:45 PM
> To: Roger Loran Bailey <rogerbailey81@aol.com>
> Cc: blind-democracy@freelists.org; my blog carl jarvis
> <carjar82.carls@blogger.com>
> Subject: [blind-democracy] Re: Donald Trump
>
> Agreed. And that should be a warning to those who rattle sabers
> without knowing how to secure their goal.
> When others have control over such important areas as education and
> the media, how do we "pre-educate" Americans? How do we undo all of
> the myths, the lies and the misconceptions that have been spun in
> order to keep us distracted and under the boot of those who own the American Empire?
> There were far better men than Joe Stalin, in as far as establishing a
> People's Government. But Stalin knew how to grab power. That should
> be first and foremost in our minds when a change of government begins.
> Given the confusion and distortion hammered into our heads, how do we
> avoid handing ourselves over to the Next Stalin?
>
> Carl Jarvis
>
>
> On 3/29/19, Roger Loran Bailey <rogerbailey81@aol.com> wrote:
>>
>> Frankly, I think that the most democratic constitution with the most
>> progressive guarantees of human rights that the world has ever known
>> was the constitution of the Soviet Union. It's too bad that the
>> Stalinist government ignored it and it is too bad that the Stalinists
>> took over before it could be fully implemented.
>> ---
>>
>> Carl Sagan
>> " The truth may be puzzling. It may take some work to grapple with.
>> It may be counterintuitive. It may contradict deeply held prejudices.
>> It may not be consonant with what we desperately want to be true. But
>> our preferences do not determine what's true. "
>> ― Carl Sagan
>>
>>
>> On 3/29/2019 7:20 PM, Carl Jarvis wrote:
>>> Each of us could probably draw up our own "ten most horrible presidents"
>>> list.
>>> And with only a few exceptions, the lists would be different.
>>> Because the United States of America was a myth, a wonderful Fairy
>>> Tale of Once Upon a Time. The new nation's constitution was an
>>> amazing document, a model parroted by nations down through the years.
>>> But all of its freedoms and all of its human rights were not given
>>> to All of the People. This new document, as wonderful as it read,
>>> was meant only for the White, Male, Landed Gentry. The Working
>>> Class, which was most of the remaining population, had to fight
>>> constantly in order to have access to any of those "Inalienable
>>> Rights" set down in the Constitution. Since the men, all White up
>>> until Barack Obama took office some 238 years later, were owned by
>>> that Oligarchy, including Obama, the selection of presidential
>>> candidates was restricted to a very specific group of right-minded men.
>>> Despite the wide variety of surface differences, these men all
>>> passed the approval of those they would serve. On my "Most
>>> Horrible" list I place Andrew Jackson high. Jackson was a cold,
>>> heartless Racist of the First Order. But Andrew Johnson had to be
>>> elbowing his way toward the top spot, too. Grant was incompetent
>>> and so was Harding...as well as being a womanizer and a crook.
>>> Wilson and Truman were "Chicken Hawks" as well as Racists. Even the
>>> great FDR was a mixed bag, playing footsie with the Dixicrats and
>>> his dealings with the Americans of Japanese descent. Kennedy was a
>>> pretty boy womanizer, along with Clinton. Nixon was a Traitor and a
>>> liar, and Reagan was pressed so closely to the backside of the
>>> wealthy elite that his lips were a permanent brown. The first Bush
>>> was a kinder gentler mass murderer and his son was an idiot mass
>>> murderer(apologies to kind, sane, decent
>>> idiots).
>>> Bill Clinton, like Barack Obama, learned to play ball with the
>>> Establishment. Their major difference was that Bill was/is a big
>>> time womanizer, and Obama is...well...is a "compromiser".
>>> This brings me to Donald Trump, and I'm already about 4 or 5 over my
>>> allotted ten. But that's alright, because Donald Trump, despite the
>>> massess of media coverage he receives, is a run of the mill
>>> professional chiseler. He comes in all colors and fancy clothes.
>>> He smirks at you as he sizes up your total worth. He will cheat, or
>>> give generously...although he can give without giving. Donald Trump
>>> is the poster boy for the New Successful American. Donald Trump is
>>> all the things we are told that we value.
>>> What do you think? Look like a picture of you?
>>>
>>> Carl Jarvis
>>>
>>> On 3/29/19, Miriam Vieni <miriamvieni@optonline.net> wrote:
>>>> I'm not sure I care about historians, nor do I care about Marxist
>>>> theory when it comes to judging presidents. and I think we need
>>>> to judge what we have on the basis of the reality in which we find
>>>> ourselves. In my lifetime, given their effects on the well being of
>>>> the majority of people, Trump is the worst. W. Bush is next in line.
>>>> But Reagan started us on this road to hell. Truman sinned against
>>>> humanity by being responsible for dropping the atom bombs and
>>>> starting the cold war. So maybe he's the worst.
>>>>
>>>> Miriam
>>>>
>>>> -----Original Message-----
>>>> From: blind-democracy-bounce@freelists.org
>>>> <blind-democracy-bounce@freelists.org> On Behalf Of Roger Loran
>>>> Bailey (Redacted sender "rogerbailey81" for DMARC)
>>>> Sent: Friday, March 29, 2019 3:04 PM
>>>> To: blind-democracy@freelists.org; Carl Jarvis <carjar82@gmail.com>
>>>> Subject: [blind-democracy] Re: Donald Trump
>>>>
>>>> I don't necessarily give a lot of credence to bourgeois
>>>> presidential historians because my class perspective is entirely
>>>> different than theirs, but, nevertheless, I understand that until
>>>> now most presidential historians named Herbert Hoover as the worst
>>>> president ever. I have seen some articles that now name Donald
>>>> Trump as having supplanted that position.
>>>>
>>>> ---
>>>>
>>>> Carl Sagan
>>>> " The truth may be puzzling. It may take some work to grapple with.
>>>> It may be counterintuitive. It may contradict deeply held
>>>> prejudices. It may not be consonant with what we desperately want
>>>> to be true. But our preferences do not determine what's true. "
>>>> ― Carl Sagan
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> On 3/29/2019 12:59 AM, Carl Jarvis wrote:
>>>>> Mostafa wrote: "He's the worst president to ever operate in the
>>>>> oval office."
>>>>> Sorry Mostafa, Donald Trump is only one of a large number of
>>>>> corrupt, mentally unbalanced men to achieve the presidency.
>>>>> The United States of America has a violent history, which I will
>>>>> not go into here. But if you care to read a fairly objective and
>>>>> accurate account of the growth of this nation, read Howard Zinn's
>>>>> "A People's History of the United States". That Oval Office has
>>>>> seated some very honorable and honest men. But it has also seen
>>>>> corrupt and greedy and self serving men.
>>>>> Personally, I believe that the honest American, who cares about
>>>>> his people and about how we treat the people of the world, still
>>>>> outnumber the cheats and those who worship the Golden Calf.
>>>>> Carl Jarvis
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> On 3/28/19, Roger Loran Bailey <dmarc-noreply@freelists.org> wrote:
>>>>>> Some states split their electoral votes. I think Nebraska is one.
>>>>>> Or am I thinking of another midwest state?
>>>>>>
>>>>>> ---
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Carl Sagan
>>>>>> " The truth may be puzzling. It may take some work to grapple
>>>>>> with. It may be counterintuitive. It may contradict deeply held
>>>>>> prejudices. It may not be consonant with what we desperately want
>>>>>> to be true. But our preferences do not determine what's true. "
>>>>>> ― Carl Sagan
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> On 3/28/2019 10:07 PM, Miriam Vieni wrote:
>>>>>>> Mustafa,
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> I'd like to correct one of the things you said. The majority of
>>>>>>> Americans did not elect Donald Trump. If the president were
>>>>>>> elected as he or she should be, by a majority of the votes cast,
>>>>>>> Hillary Clinton would have won the election. She received 3
>>>>>>> million more votes than Mr. Trump. He became President in the
>>>>>>> same way that George W. Bush did. Their election was due to a
>>>>>>> mechanism called the electoral college. The electoral college
>>>>>>> was developed in order to deny the vote to the ordinary people.
>>>>>>> Each state is allotted a certain number of electoral votes. If
>>>>>>> the majority of the popular vote goes to the Republican party,
>>>>>>> for example, then all of the electoral votes in that particular
>>>>>>> state go to the presidential candidate.
>>>>>>> So if 51% of people in Michigan voted for Trump, he'd get all of
>>>>>>> the electoral votes, not 51% of them. He won because a few key
>>>>>>> states had a majority of Republican votes.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> There are many complicated reasons that explain why the US
>>>>>>> government is functioning as it is at this point. But in
>>>>>>> addition to all of the historical, sociological, and financial
>>>>>>> reasons, it is important to recognize that Donald J. Trump is a
>>>>>>> mentally, emotionally disabled man, who, along with having been
>>>>>>> dishonest and sheltered by his wealth from the consequences of
>>>>>>> his actions for all of his life, is not competent to undertake
>>>>>>> the tasks of the presidency.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Miriam
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> -----Original Message-----
>>>>>>> From: blind-democracy-bounce@freelists.org
>>>>>>> <blind-democracy-bounce@freelists.org> On Behalf Of Mostafa
>>>>>>> Almahdy
>>>>>>> Sent: Thursday, March 28, 2019 8:21 PM
>>>>>>> To: blind-democracy@freelists.org
>>>>>>> Subject: [blind-democracy] Donald Trump
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Well, although I am not American, I'd still like to join the
>>>>>>> discussion.
>>>>>>> I
>>>>>>> wonder, how would George Washington react if he encountered
>>>>>>> Donald Trump operating in the White House? I bet he would have
>>>>>>> gone mad. He would say, who has brought this hellion here? He
>>>>>>> won't imagine that the majority of Americans are the ones who
>>>>>>> did.
>>>>>>> Trump isn't himself the prob, he's just a tool that governs the
>>>>>>> corporal establishment and its material plethora. It is a system
>>>>>>> that aids the rich to constantly become richer and the poor
>>>>>>> shall constantly become poorer.
>>>>>>> As I decisively stated, the practice of lobbyism is the major
>>>>>>> factor by which law enforcement has been perfectly surmounted in
>>>>>>> the States.
>>>>>>> Everyone knew for sure that Trump is a horrific felon, even
>>>>>>> those who categorically defend him.
>>>>>>> Nonetheless, with the power of his copious wealth, he was able
>>>>>>> to either threaten or bribe the special council. Perhaps he has
>>>>>>> done both, who knows? As Cohen has somewhat purported in his
>>>>>>> testimonial to Congress, Trump is besieged by bunch of guardians
>>>>>>> including attorneys etc. He warned people that Trump doesn't
>>>>>>> care about allegiance. He'd rather pay people to protect him and
>>>>>>> to even lie for him if it is necessary. Right now, Trump thinks
>>>>>>> he is wholly protected. No one is higher than him to oppugn his
>>>>>>> deeds. Even congress is bought, and it amply complies to mr
>>>>>>> Trump demands.
>>>>>>> Donald Trump resembles the mass nescience of average Americans
>>>>>>> on a rather broader scale. They elected him after all. Many of
>>>>>>> them are seemingly in favour of his typical impudence and
>>>>>>> inapplicably crude remarks.
>>>>>>> Trump's
>>>>>>> disgraceful rhetoric is not aliened to us. He perennially
>>>>>>> clashed and expressed disapprobation of reporters asking him
>>>>>>> questions. He's just so petulant about that. Donald Trump is
>>>>>>> impeachably caged for explicitly uttering racism. He rudely
>>>>>>> mocked accents of people on stage. He spoke terms that are
>>>>>>> leastwise, quite abhorrent in essence. He easily mortifies
>>>>>>> major rivals. Now, who admitted this incompetent individual to
>>>>>>> act swaggeringly in Oval Office? Well, they're just some bunch
>>>>>>> of racists.
>>>>>>> They're just bunch of outrageous white supremacists who're
>>>>>>> mostly Protestants. They're merely bigots and hate provokers.
>>>>>>> They speak about Islam derogatorily. As they incessantly truckle
>>>>>>> to satisfy the Zionist camp, they relentlessly attempt to
>>>>>>> marginalise, denigrate and demonise Islam out of malice. This is
>>>>>>> how Donald Trump is unremittingly salvaged, despite his
>>>>>>> denotative commission of major offences. He works by and for the
>>>>>>> Zionist lobby and that's quite obvious. Donald Trump has plainly
>>>>>>> breached the longly chanted American principles of democracy,
>>>>>>> ethnic equality and the allegedly promoted prevention of racial disparity.
>>>>>>> He
>>>>>>> discourteously assaulted immigrants and people of darker complexion.
>>>>>>> He's
>>>>>>> the worst president to ever operate in oval office. Many people
>>>>>>> are so lenified with Trump's absonant disposal. They consider
>>>>>>> him somewhat their daddy. Well, he's basically a demagogue. If
>>>>>>> some of you aren't so familiar with this term, he is a political
>>>>>>> leader who seeks endorsement with appealing to popular passions
>>>>>>> and prejudices. This is exactly what Trump does. The nuance of
>>>>>>> longly proclaimed American fundamental principles has been
>>>>>>> utterly ruined in Trump's miserable era. However, there are
>>>>>>> Americans who're quite disappointed with Trump being
>>>>>>> unfortunately their president.
>>>>>>> I knew people who left the States shortly after election results
>>>>>>> have declared him winning the presidential race. Donald Trump
>>>>>>> doesn't necessarily represent many Americans. He neither doesn't
>>>>>>> represent the American dream. It is essentially based on
>>>>>>> genuinely practiced democratic tenets such as freedom of speech,
>>>>>>> freedom of embracement as well as defection of faith or notion.
>>>>>>> I knew people who felicitously live in the States with being
>>>>>>> Muslims. They never felt disparaged until Trump came.
>>>>>>> I
>>>>>>> personally am not so invoked to Americanism. Be that as it may,
>>>>>>> I do not criticise people for their dissension with me. I solely
>>>>>>> repudiate acts that are destined to diminish, slander or
>>>>>>> manipulate my identity. I communicate beautifully with people
>>>>>>> who do not come near my faith and heritage. I tolerate
>>>>>>> difference of opinion and belief. I at the same time won't ever
>>>>>>> neglect my conscience to gratify those of special agenda.
>>>>>>> It
>>>>>>> is
>>>>>>> significantly crucial to recognise that I wholly represent my
>>>>>>> culture and identity and I am not prepared at any rate to alter
>>>>>>> that. Thank you for reading, cordially.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>
>
>
>
>
Sunday, March 31, 2019
Saturday, March 30, 2019
Re: [blind-democracy] Re: Donald Trump
Agreed. And that should be a warning to those who rattle sabers
without knowing how to secure their goal.
When others have control over such important areas as education and
the media, how do we "pre-educate" Americans? How do we undo all of
the myths, the lies and the misconceptions that have been spun in
order to keep us distracted and under the boot of those who own the
American Empire?
There were far better men than Joe Stalin, in as far as establishing a
People's Government. But Stalin knew how to grab power. That should
be first and foremost in our minds when a change of government begins.
Given the confusion and distortion hammered into our heads, how do we
avoid handing ourselves over to the Next Stalin?
Carl Jarvis
On 3/29/19, Roger Loran Bailey <rogerbailey81@aol.com> wrote:
>
> Frankly, I think that the most democratic constitution with the most
> progressive guarantees of human rights that the world has ever known was the
> constitution of the Soviet Union. It's too bad that the Stalinist government
> ignored it and it is too bad that the Stalinists took over before it could
> be fully implemented.
> ---
>
> Carl Sagan
> " The truth may be puzzling. It may take some work to grapple with. It may
> be counterintuitive. It may contradict deeply held prejudices. It may not be
> consonant with what we desperately want to be true. But our preferences do
> not determine what's true. "
> ― Carl Sagan
>
>
> On 3/29/2019 7:20 PM, Carl Jarvis wrote:
>> Each of us could probably draw up our own "ten most horrible presidents"
>> list.
>> And with only a few exceptions, the lists would be different. Because
>> the United States of America was a myth, a wonderful Fairy Tale of
>> Once Upon a Time. The new nation's constitution was an amazing
>> document, a model parroted by nations down through the years. But all
>> of its freedoms and all of its human rights were not given to All of
>> the People. This new document, as wonderful as it read, was meant
>> only for the White, Male, Landed Gentry. The Working Class, which was
>> most of the remaining population, had to fight constantly in order to
>> have access to any of those "Inalienable Rights" set down in the
>> Constitution. Since the men, all White up until Barack Obama took
>> office some 238 years later, were owned by that Oligarchy, including
>> Obama, the selection of presidential candidates was restricted to a
>> very specific group of right-minded men.
>> Despite the wide variety of surface differences, these men all passed
>> the approval of those they would serve. On my "Most Horrible" list I
>> place Andrew Jackson high. Jackson was a cold, heartless Racist of
>> the First Order. But Andrew Johnson had to be elbowing his way toward
>> the top spot, too. Grant was incompetent and so was Harding...as well
>> as being a womanizer and a crook. Wilson and Truman were "Chicken
>> Hawks" as well as Racists. Even the great FDR was a mixed bag,
>> playing footsie with the Dixicrats and his dealings with the Americans
>> of Japanese descent. Kennedy was a pretty boy womanizer, along with
>> Clinton. Nixon was a Traitor and a liar, and Reagan was pressed so
>> closely to the backside of the wealthy elite that his lips were a
>> permanent brown. The first Bush was a kinder gentler mass murderer
>> and his son was an idiot mass murderer(apologies to kind, sane, decent
>> idiots).
>> Bill Clinton, like Barack Obama, learned to play ball with the
>> Establishment. Their major difference was that Bill was/is a big time
>> womanizer, and Obama is...well...is a "compromiser".
>> This brings me to Donald Trump, and I'm already about 4 or 5 over my
>> allotted ten. But that's alright, because Donald Trump, despite the
>> massess of media coverage he receives, is a run of the mill
>> professional chiseler. He comes in all colors and fancy clothes. He
>> smirks at you as he sizes up your total worth. He will cheat, or give
>> generously...although he can give without giving. Donald Trump is the
>> poster boy for the New Successful American. Donald Trump is all the
>> things we are told that we value.
>> What do you think? Look like a picture of you?
>>
>> Carl Jarvis
>>
>> On 3/29/19, Miriam Vieni <miriamvieni@optonline.net> wrote:
>>> I'm not sure I care about historians, nor do I care about Marxist theory
>>> when it comes to judging presidents. and I think we need to judge what
>>> we
>>> have on the basis of the reality in which we find ourselves. In my
>>> lifetime,
>>> given their effects on the well being of the majority of people, Trump
>>> is
>>> the worst. W. Bush is next in line. But Reagan started us on this road
>>> to
>>> hell. Truman sinned against humanity by being responsible for dropping
>>> the
>>> atom bombs and starting the cold war. So maybe he's the worst.
>>>
>>> Miriam
>>>
>>> -----Original Message-----
>>> From: blind-democracy-bounce@freelists.org
>>> <blind-democracy-bounce@freelists.org> On Behalf Of Roger Loran Bailey
>>> (Redacted sender "rogerbailey81" for DMARC)
>>> Sent: Friday, March 29, 2019 3:04 PM
>>> To: blind-democracy@freelists.org; Carl Jarvis <carjar82@gmail.com>
>>> Subject: [blind-democracy] Re: Donald Trump
>>>
>>> I don't necessarily give a lot of credence to bourgeois presidential
>>> historians because my class perspective is entirely different than
>>> theirs,
>>> but, nevertheless, I understand that until now most presidential
>>> historians
>>> named Herbert Hoover as the worst president ever. I have seen some
>>> articles
>>> that now name Donald Trump as having supplanted that position.
>>>
>>> ---
>>>
>>> Carl Sagan
>>> " The truth may be puzzling. It may take some work to grapple with. It
>>> may
>>> be counterintuitive. It may contradict deeply held prejudices. It may not
>>> be
>>> consonant with what we desperately want to be true. But our preferences
>>> do
>>> not determine what's true. "
>>> ― Carl Sagan
>>>
>>>
>>> On 3/29/2019 12:59 AM, Carl Jarvis wrote:
>>>> Mostafa wrote: "He's the worst president to ever operate in the oval
>>>> office."
>>>> Sorry Mostafa, Donald Trump is only one of a large number of corrupt,
>>>> mentally unbalanced men to achieve the presidency.
>>>> The United States of America has a violent history, which I will not
>>>> go into here. But if you care to read a fairly objective and accurate
>>>> account of the growth of this nation, read Howard Zinn's "A People's
>>>> History of the United States". That Oval Office has seated some very
>>>> honorable and honest men. But it has also seen corrupt and greedy and
>>>> self serving men.
>>>> Personally, I believe that the honest American, who cares about his
>>>> people and about how we treat the people of the world, still outnumber
>>>> the cheats and those who worship the Golden Calf.
>>>> Carl Jarvis
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> On 3/28/19, Roger Loran Bailey <dmarc-noreply@freelists.org> wrote:
>>>>> Some states split their electoral votes. I think Nebraska is one. Or
>>>>> am
>>>>> I thinking of another midwest state?
>>>>>
>>>>> ---
>>>>>
>>>>> Carl Sagan
>>>>> " The truth may be puzzling. It may take some work to grapple with. It
>>>>> may
>>>>> be counterintuitive. It may contradict deeply held prejudices. It may
>>>>> not
>>>>> be
>>>>> consonant with what we desperately want to be true. But our
>>>>> preferences
>>>>> do
>>>>> not determine what's true. "
>>>>> ― Carl Sagan
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> On 3/28/2019 10:07 PM, Miriam Vieni wrote:
>>>>>> Mustafa,
>>>>>>
>>>>>> I'd like to correct one of the things you said. The majority of
>>>>>> Americans
>>>>>> did not elect Donald Trump. If the president were elected as he or
>>>>>> she
>>>>>> should be, by a majority of the votes cast, Hillary Clinton would
>>>>>> have
>>>>>> won
>>>>>> the election. She received 3 million more votes than Mr. Trump. He
>>>>>> became
>>>>>> President in the same way that George W. Bush did. Their election was
>>>>>> due
>>>>>> to a mechanism called the electoral college. The electoral college
>>>>>> was
>>>>>> developed in order to deny the vote to the ordinary people. Each
>>>>>> state
>>>>>> is
>>>>>> allotted a certain number of electoral votes. If the majority of the
>>>>>> popular vote goes to the Republican party, for example, then all of
>>>>>> the
>>>>>> electoral votes in that particular state go to the presidential
>>>>>> candidate.
>>>>>> So if 51% of people in Michigan voted for Trump, he'd get all of the
>>>>>> electoral votes, not 51% of them. He won because a few key states had
>>>>>> a
>>>>>> majority of Republican votes.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> There are many complicated reasons that explain why the US government
>>>>>> is
>>>>>> functioning as it is at this point. But in addition to all of the
>>>>>> historical, sociological, and financial reasons, it is important to
>>>>>> recognize that Donald J. Trump is a mentally, emotionally disabled
>>>>>> man,
>>>>>> who, along with having been dishonest and sheltered by his wealth
>>>>>> from
>>>>>> the
>>>>>> consequences of his actions for all of his life, is not competent to
>>>>>> undertake the tasks of the presidency.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Miriam
>>>>>>
>>>>>> -----Original Message-----
>>>>>> From: blind-democracy-bounce@freelists.org
>>>>>> <blind-democracy-bounce@freelists.org> On Behalf Of Mostafa Almahdy
>>>>>> Sent: Thursday, March 28, 2019 8:21 PM
>>>>>> To: blind-democracy@freelists.org
>>>>>> Subject: [blind-democracy] Donald Trump
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Well, although I am not American, I'd still like to join the
>>>>>> discussion.
>>>>>> I
>>>>>> wonder, how would George Washington react if he encountered Donald
>>>>>> Trump
>>>>>> operating in the White House? I bet he would have gone mad. He would
>>>>>> say,
>>>>>> who has brought this hellion here? He won't imagine that the majority
>>>>>> of
>>>>>> Americans are the ones who did.
>>>>>> Trump isn't himself the prob, he's just a tool that governs the
>>>>>> corporal
>>>>>> establishment and its material plethora. It is a system that aids the
>>>>>> rich
>>>>>> to constantly become richer and the poor shall constantly become
>>>>>> poorer.
>>>>>> As I decisively stated, the practice of lobbyism is the major factor
>>>>>> by
>>>>>> which law enforcement has been perfectly surmounted in the States.
>>>>>> Everyone knew for sure that Trump is a horrific felon, even those who
>>>>>> categorically defend him.
>>>>>> Nonetheless, with the power of his copious wealth, he was able to
>>>>>> either
>>>>>> threaten or bribe the special council. Perhaps he has done both, who
>>>>>> knows? As Cohen has somewhat purported in his testimonial to
>>>>>> Congress,
>>>>>> Trump is besieged by bunch of guardians including attorneys etc. He
>>>>>> warned
>>>>>> people that Trump doesn't care about allegiance. He'd rather pay
>>>>>> people
>>>>>> to
>>>>>> protect him and to even lie for him if it is necessary. Right now,
>>>>>> Trump
>>>>>> thinks he is wholly protected. No one is higher than him to oppugn
>>>>>> his
>>>>>> deeds. Even congress is bought, and it amply complies to mr Trump
>>>>>> demands.
>>>>>> Donald Trump resembles the mass nescience of average Americans on a
>>>>>> rather
>>>>>> broader scale. They elected him after all. Many of them are seemingly
>>>>>> in
>>>>>> favour of his typical impudence and inapplicably crude remarks.
>>>>>> Trump's
>>>>>> disgraceful rhetoric is not aliened to us. He perennially clashed and
>>>>>> expressed disapprobation of reporters asking him questions. He's just
>>>>>> so
>>>>>> petulant about that. Donald Trump is impeachably caged for explicitly
>>>>>> uttering racism. He rudely mocked accents of people on stage. He
>>>>>> spoke
>>>>>> terms that are leastwise, quite abhorrent in essence. He easily
>>>>>> mortifies
>>>>>> major rivals. Now, who admitted this incompetent individual to act
>>>>>> swaggeringly in Oval Office? Well, they're just some bunch of
>>>>>> racists.
>>>>>> They're just bunch of outrageous white supremacists who're mostly
>>>>>> Protestants. They're merely bigots and hate provokers. They speak
>>>>>> about
>>>>>> Islam derogatorily. As they incessantly truckle to satisfy the
>>>>>> Zionist
>>>>>> camp, they relentlessly attempt to marginalise, denigrate and
>>>>>> demonise
>>>>>> Islam out of malice. This is how Donald Trump is unremittingly
>>>>>> salvaged,
>>>>>> despite his denotative commission of major offences. He works by and
>>>>>> for
>>>>>> the Zionist lobby and that's quite obvious. Donald Trump has plainly
>>>>>> breached the longly chanted American principles of democracy, ethnic
>>>>>> equality and the allegedly promoted prevention of racial disparity.
>>>>>> He
>>>>>> discourteously assaulted immigrants and people of darker complexion.
>>>>>> He's
>>>>>> the worst president to ever operate in oval office. Many people are
>>>>>> so
>>>>>> lenified with Trump's absonant disposal. They consider him somewhat
>>>>>> their
>>>>>> daddy. Well, he's basically a demagogue. If some of you aren't so
>>>>>> familiar
>>>>>> with this term, he is a political leader who seeks endorsement with
>>>>>> appealing to popular passions and prejudices. This is exactly what
>>>>>> Trump
>>>>>> does. The nuance of longly proclaimed American fundamental principles
>>>>>> has
>>>>>> been utterly ruined in Trump's miserable era. However, there are
>>>>>> Americans
>>>>>> who're quite disappointed with Trump being unfortunately their
>>>>>> president.
>>>>>> I knew people who left the States shortly after election results have
>>>>>> declared him winning the presidential race. Donald Trump doesn't
>>>>>> necessarily represent many Americans. He neither doesn't represent
>>>>>> the
>>>>>> American dream. It is essentially based on genuinely practiced
>>>>>> democratic
>>>>>> tenets such as freedom of speech, freedom of embracement as well as
>>>>>> defection of faith or notion. I knew people who felicitously live in
>>>>>> the
>>>>>> States with being Muslims. They never felt disparaged until Trump
>>>>>> came.
>>>>>> I
>>>>>> personally am not so invoked to Americanism. Be that as it may, I do
>>>>>> not
>>>>>> criticise people for their dissension with me. I solely repudiate
>>>>>> acts
>>>>>> that are destined to diminish, slander or manipulate my identity. I
>>>>>> communicate beautifully with people who do not come near my faith and
>>>>>> heritage. I tolerate difference of opinion and belief. I at the same
>>>>>> time
>>>>>> won't ever neglect my conscience to gratify those of special agenda.
>>>>>> It
>>>>>> is
>>>>>> significantly crucial to recognise that I wholly represent my culture
>>>>>> and
>>>>>> identity and I am not prepared at any rate to alter that. Thank you
>>>>>> for
>>>>>> reading, cordially.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>
>>>
>
without knowing how to secure their goal.
When others have control over such important areas as education and
the media, how do we "pre-educate" Americans? How do we undo all of
the myths, the lies and the misconceptions that have been spun in
order to keep us distracted and under the boot of those who own the
American Empire?
There were far better men than Joe Stalin, in as far as establishing a
People's Government. But Stalin knew how to grab power. That should
be first and foremost in our minds when a change of government begins.
Given the confusion and distortion hammered into our heads, how do we
avoid handing ourselves over to the Next Stalin?
Carl Jarvis
On 3/29/19, Roger Loran Bailey <rogerbailey81@aol.com> wrote:
>
> Frankly, I think that the most democratic constitution with the most
> progressive guarantees of human rights that the world has ever known was the
> constitution of the Soviet Union. It's too bad that the Stalinist government
> ignored it and it is too bad that the Stalinists took over before it could
> be fully implemented.
> ---
>
> Carl Sagan
> " The truth may be puzzling. It may take some work to grapple with. It may
> be counterintuitive. It may contradict deeply held prejudices. It may not be
> consonant with what we desperately want to be true. But our preferences do
> not determine what's true. "
> ― Carl Sagan
>
>
> On 3/29/2019 7:20 PM, Carl Jarvis wrote:
>> Each of us could probably draw up our own "ten most horrible presidents"
>> list.
>> And with only a few exceptions, the lists would be different. Because
>> the United States of America was a myth, a wonderful Fairy Tale of
>> Once Upon a Time. The new nation's constitution was an amazing
>> document, a model parroted by nations down through the years. But all
>> of its freedoms and all of its human rights were not given to All of
>> the People. This new document, as wonderful as it read, was meant
>> only for the White, Male, Landed Gentry. The Working Class, which was
>> most of the remaining population, had to fight constantly in order to
>> have access to any of those "Inalienable Rights" set down in the
>> Constitution. Since the men, all White up until Barack Obama took
>> office some 238 years later, were owned by that Oligarchy, including
>> Obama, the selection of presidential candidates was restricted to a
>> very specific group of right-minded men.
>> Despite the wide variety of surface differences, these men all passed
>> the approval of those they would serve. On my "Most Horrible" list I
>> place Andrew Jackson high. Jackson was a cold, heartless Racist of
>> the First Order. But Andrew Johnson had to be elbowing his way toward
>> the top spot, too. Grant was incompetent and so was Harding...as well
>> as being a womanizer and a crook. Wilson and Truman were "Chicken
>> Hawks" as well as Racists. Even the great FDR was a mixed bag,
>> playing footsie with the Dixicrats and his dealings with the Americans
>> of Japanese descent. Kennedy was a pretty boy womanizer, along with
>> Clinton. Nixon was a Traitor and a liar, and Reagan was pressed so
>> closely to the backside of the wealthy elite that his lips were a
>> permanent brown. The first Bush was a kinder gentler mass murderer
>> and his son was an idiot mass murderer(apologies to kind, sane, decent
>> idiots).
>> Bill Clinton, like Barack Obama, learned to play ball with the
>> Establishment. Their major difference was that Bill was/is a big time
>> womanizer, and Obama is...well...is a "compromiser".
>> This brings me to Donald Trump, and I'm already about 4 or 5 over my
>> allotted ten. But that's alright, because Donald Trump, despite the
>> massess of media coverage he receives, is a run of the mill
>> professional chiseler. He comes in all colors and fancy clothes. He
>> smirks at you as he sizes up your total worth. He will cheat, or give
>> generously...although he can give without giving. Donald Trump is the
>> poster boy for the New Successful American. Donald Trump is all the
>> things we are told that we value.
>> What do you think? Look like a picture of you?
>>
>> Carl Jarvis
>>
>> On 3/29/19, Miriam Vieni <miriamvieni@optonline.net> wrote:
>>> I'm not sure I care about historians, nor do I care about Marxist theory
>>> when it comes to judging presidents. and I think we need to judge what
>>> we
>>> have on the basis of the reality in which we find ourselves. In my
>>> lifetime,
>>> given their effects on the well being of the majority of people, Trump
>>> is
>>> the worst. W. Bush is next in line. But Reagan started us on this road
>>> to
>>> hell. Truman sinned against humanity by being responsible for dropping
>>> the
>>> atom bombs and starting the cold war. So maybe he's the worst.
>>>
>>> Miriam
>>>
>>> -----Original Message-----
>>> From: blind-democracy-bounce@freelists.org
>>> <blind-democracy-bounce@freelists.org> On Behalf Of Roger Loran Bailey
>>> (Redacted sender "rogerbailey81" for DMARC)
>>> Sent: Friday, March 29, 2019 3:04 PM
>>> To: blind-democracy@freelists.org; Carl Jarvis <carjar82@gmail.com>
>>> Subject: [blind-democracy] Re: Donald Trump
>>>
>>> I don't necessarily give a lot of credence to bourgeois presidential
>>> historians because my class perspective is entirely different than
>>> theirs,
>>> but, nevertheless, I understand that until now most presidential
>>> historians
>>> named Herbert Hoover as the worst president ever. I have seen some
>>> articles
>>> that now name Donald Trump as having supplanted that position.
>>>
>>> ---
>>>
>>> Carl Sagan
>>> " The truth may be puzzling. It may take some work to grapple with. It
>>> may
>>> be counterintuitive. It may contradict deeply held prejudices. It may not
>>> be
>>> consonant with what we desperately want to be true. But our preferences
>>> do
>>> not determine what's true. "
>>> ― Carl Sagan
>>>
>>>
>>> On 3/29/2019 12:59 AM, Carl Jarvis wrote:
>>>> Mostafa wrote: "He's the worst president to ever operate in the oval
>>>> office."
>>>> Sorry Mostafa, Donald Trump is only one of a large number of corrupt,
>>>> mentally unbalanced men to achieve the presidency.
>>>> The United States of America has a violent history, which I will not
>>>> go into here. But if you care to read a fairly objective and accurate
>>>> account of the growth of this nation, read Howard Zinn's "A People's
>>>> History of the United States". That Oval Office has seated some very
>>>> honorable and honest men. But it has also seen corrupt and greedy and
>>>> self serving men.
>>>> Personally, I believe that the honest American, who cares about his
>>>> people and about how we treat the people of the world, still outnumber
>>>> the cheats and those who worship the Golden Calf.
>>>> Carl Jarvis
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> On 3/28/19, Roger Loran Bailey <dmarc-noreply@freelists.org> wrote:
>>>>> Some states split their electoral votes. I think Nebraska is one. Or
>>>>> am
>>>>> I thinking of another midwest state?
>>>>>
>>>>> ---
>>>>>
>>>>> Carl Sagan
>>>>> " The truth may be puzzling. It may take some work to grapple with. It
>>>>> may
>>>>> be counterintuitive. It may contradict deeply held prejudices. It may
>>>>> not
>>>>> be
>>>>> consonant with what we desperately want to be true. But our
>>>>> preferences
>>>>> do
>>>>> not determine what's true. "
>>>>> ― Carl Sagan
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> On 3/28/2019 10:07 PM, Miriam Vieni wrote:
>>>>>> Mustafa,
>>>>>>
>>>>>> I'd like to correct one of the things you said. The majority of
>>>>>> Americans
>>>>>> did not elect Donald Trump. If the president were elected as he or
>>>>>> she
>>>>>> should be, by a majority of the votes cast, Hillary Clinton would
>>>>>> have
>>>>>> won
>>>>>> the election. She received 3 million more votes than Mr. Trump. He
>>>>>> became
>>>>>> President in the same way that George W. Bush did. Their election was
>>>>>> due
>>>>>> to a mechanism called the electoral college. The electoral college
>>>>>> was
>>>>>> developed in order to deny the vote to the ordinary people. Each
>>>>>> state
>>>>>> is
>>>>>> allotted a certain number of electoral votes. If the majority of the
>>>>>> popular vote goes to the Republican party, for example, then all of
>>>>>> the
>>>>>> electoral votes in that particular state go to the presidential
>>>>>> candidate.
>>>>>> So if 51% of people in Michigan voted for Trump, he'd get all of the
>>>>>> electoral votes, not 51% of them. He won because a few key states had
>>>>>> a
>>>>>> majority of Republican votes.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> There are many complicated reasons that explain why the US government
>>>>>> is
>>>>>> functioning as it is at this point. But in addition to all of the
>>>>>> historical, sociological, and financial reasons, it is important to
>>>>>> recognize that Donald J. Trump is a mentally, emotionally disabled
>>>>>> man,
>>>>>> who, along with having been dishonest and sheltered by his wealth
>>>>>> from
>>>>>> the
>>>>>> consequences of his actions for all of his life, is not competent to
>>>>>> undertake the tasks of the presidency.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Miriam
>>>>>>
>>>>>> -----Original Message-----
>>>>>> From: blind-democracy-bounce@freelists.org
>>>>>> <blind-democracy-bounce@freelists.org> On Behalf Of Mostafa Almahdy
>>>>>> Sent: Thursday, March 28, 2019 8:21 PM
>>>>>> To: blind-democracy@freelists.org
>>>>>> Subject: [blind-democracy] Donald Trump
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Well, although I am not American, I'd still like to join the
>>>>>> discussion.
>>>>>> I
>>>>>> wonder, how would George Washington react if he encountered Donald
>>>>>> Trump
>>>>>> operating in the White House? I bet he would have gone mad. He would
>>>>>> say,
>>>>>> who has brought this hellion here? He won't imagine that the majority
>>>>>> of
>>>>>> Americans are the ones who did.
>>>>>> Trump isn't himself the prob, he's just a tool that governs the
>>>>>> corporal
>>>>>> establishment and its material plethora. It is a system that aids the
>>>>>> rich
>>>>>> to constantly become richer and the poor shall constantly become
>>>>>> poorer.
>>>>>> As I decisively stated, the practice of lobbyism is the major factor
>>>>>> by
>>>>>> which law enforcement has been perfectly surmounted in the States.
>>>>>> Everyone knew for sure that Trump is a horrific felon, even those who
>>>>>> categorically defend him.
>>>>>> Nonetheless, with the power of his copious wealth, he was able to
>>>>>> either
>>>>>> threaten or bribe the special council. Perhaps he has done both, who
>>>>>> knows? As Cohen has somewhat purported in his testimonial to
>>>>>> Congress,
>>>>>> Trump is besieged by bunch of guardians including attorneys etc. He
>>>>>> warned
>>>>>> people that Trump doesn't care about allegiance. He'd rather pay
>>>>>> people
>>>>>> to
>>>>>> protect him and to even lie for him if it is necessary. Right now,
>>>>>> Trump
>>>>>> thinks he is wholly protected. No one is higher than him to oppugn
>>>>>> his
>>>>>> deeds. Even congress is bought, and it amply complies to mr Trump
>>>>>> demands.
>>>>>> Donald Trump resembles the mass nescience of average Americans on a
>>>>>> rather
>>>>>> broader scale. They elected him after all. Many of them are seemingly
>>>>>> in
>>>>>> favour of his typical impudence and inapplicably crude remarks.
>>>>>> Trump's
>>>>>> disgraceful rhetoric is not aliened to us. He perennially clashed and
>>>>>> expressed disapprobation of reporters asking him questions. He's just
>>>>>> so
>>>>>> petulant about that. Donald Trump is impeachably caged for explicitly
>>>>>> uttering racism. He rudely mocked accents of people on stage. He
>>>>>> spoke
>>>>>> terms that are leastwise, quite abhorrent in essence. He easily
>>>>>> mortifies
>>>>>> major rivals. Now, who admitted this incompetent individual to act
>>>>>> swaggeringly in Oval Office? Well, they're just some bunch of
>>>>>> racists.
>>>>>> They're just bunch of outrageous white supremacists who're mostly
>>>>>> Protestants. They're merely bigots and hate provokers. They speak
>>>>>> about
>>>>>> Islam derogatorily. As they incessantly truckle to satisfy the
>>>>>> Zionist
>>>>>> camp, they relentlessly attempt to marginalise, denigrate and
>>>>>> demonise
>>>>>> Islam out of malice. This is how Donald Trump is unremittingly
>>>>>> salvaged,
>>>>>> despite his denotative commission of major offences. He works by and
>>>>>> for
>>>>>> the Zionist lobby and that's quite obvious. Donald Trump has plainly
>>>>>> breached the longly chanted American principles of democracy, ethnic
>>>>>> equality and the allegedly promoted prevention of racial disparity.
>>>>>> He
>>>>>> discourteously assaulted immigrants and people of darker complexion.
>>>>>> He's
>>>>>> the worst president to ever operate in oval office. Many people are
>>>>>> so
>>>>>> lenified with Trump's absonant disposal. They consider him somewhat
>>>>>> their
>>>>>> daddy. Well, he's basically a demagogue. If some of you aren't so
>>>>>> familiar
>>>>>> with this term, he is a political leader who seeks endorsement with
>>>>>> appealing to popular passions and prejudices. This is exactly what
>>>>>> Trump
>>>>>> does. The nuance of longly proclaimed American fundamental principles
>>>>>> has
>>>>>> been utterly ruined in Trump's miserable era. However, there are
>>>>>> Americans
>>>>>> who're quite disappointed with Trump being unfortunately their
>>>>>> president.
>>>>>> I knew people who left the States shortly after election results have
>>>>>> declared him winning the presidential race. Donald Trump doesn't
>>>>>> necessarily represent many Americans. He neither doesn't represent
>>>>>> the
>>>>>> American dream. It is essentially based on genuinely practiced
>>>>>> democratic
>>>>>> tenets such as freedom of speech, freedom of embracement as well as
>>>>>> defection of faith or notion. I knew people who felicitously live in
>>>>>> the
>>>>>> States with being Muslims. They never felt disparaged until Trump
>>>>>> came.
>>>>>> I
>>>>>> personally am not so invoked to Americanism. Be that as it may, I do
>>>>>> not
>>>>>> criticise people for their dissension with me. I solely repudiate
>>>>>> acts
>>>>>> that are destined to diminish, slander or manipulate my identity. I
>>>>>> communicate beautifully with people who do not come near my faith and
>>>>>> heritage. I tolerate difference of opinion and belief. I at the same
>>>>>> time
>>>>>> won't ever neglect my conscience to gratify those of special agenda.
>>>>>> It
>>>>>> is
>>>>>> significantly crucial to recognise that I wholly represent my culture
>>>>>> and
>>>>>> identity and I am not prepared at any rate to alter that. Thank you
>>>>>> for
>>>>>> reading, cordially.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>
>>>
>
Friday, March 29, 2019
Re: [blind-democracy] Re: Donald Trump
Frankly, I think that the most democratic constitution with the most progressive guarantees of human rights that the world has ever known was the constitution of the Soviet Union. It's too bad that the Stalinist government ignored it and it is too bad that the Stalinists took over before it could be fully implemented.
---
Carl Sagan
" The truth may be puzzling. It may take some work to grapple with. It may be counterintuitive. It may contradict deeply held prejudices. It may not be consonant with what we desperately want to be true. But our preferences do not determine what's true. "
― Carl Sagan
On 3/29/2019 7:20 PM, Carl Jarvis wrote:
> Each of us could probably draw up our own "ten most horrible presidents" list.
> And with only a few exceptions, the lists would be different. Because
> the United States of America was a myth, a wonderful Fairy Tale of
> Once Upon a Time. The new nation's constitution was an amazing
> document, a model parroted by nations down through the years. But all
> of its freedoms and all of its human rights were not given to All of
> the People. This new document, as wonderful as it read, was meant
> only for the White, Male, Landed Gentry. The Working Class, which was
> most of the remaining population, had to fight constantly in order to
> have access to any of those "Inalienable Rights" set down in the
> Constitution. Since the men, all White up until Barack Obama took
> office some 238 years later, were owned by that Oligarchy, including
> Obama, the selection of presidential candidates was restricted to a
> very specific group of right-minded men.
> Despite the wide variety of surface differences, these men all passed
> the approval of those they would serve. On my "Most Horrible" list I
> place Andrew Jackson high. Jackson was a cold, heartless Racist of
> the First Order. But Andrew Johnson had to be elbowing his way toward
> the top spot, too. Grant was incompetent and so was Harding...as well
> as being a womanizer and a crook. Wilson and Truman were "Chicken
> Hawks" as well as Racists. Even the great FDR was a mixed bag,
> playing footsie with the Dixicrats and his dealings with the Americans
> of Japanese descent. Kennedy was a pretty boy womanizer, along with
> Clinton. Nixon was a Traitor and a liar, and Reagan was pressed so
> closely to the backside of the wealthy elite that his lips were a
> permanent brown. The first Bush was a kinder gentler mass murderer
> and his son was an idiot mass murderer(apologies to kind, sane, decent
> idiots).
> Bill Clinton, like Barack Obama, learned to play ball with the
> Establishment. Their major difference was that Bill was/is a big time
> womanizer, and Obama is...well...is a "compromiser".
> This brings me to Donald Trump, and I'm already about 4 or 5 over my
> allotted ten. But that's alright, because Donald Trump, despite the
> massess of media coverage he receives, is a run of the mill
> professional chiseler. He comes in all colors and fancy clothes. He
> smirks at you as he sizes up your total worth. He will cheat, or give
> generously...although he can give without giving. Donald Trump is the
> poster boy for the New Successful American. Donald Trump is all the
> things we are told that we value.
> What do you think? Look like a picture of you?
>
> Carl Jarvis
>
> On 3/29/19, Miriam Vieni <miriamvieni@optonline.net> wrote:
>> I'm not sure I care about historians, nor do I care about Marxist theory
>> when it comes to judging presidents. and I think we need to judge what we
>> have on the basis of the reality in which we find ourselves. In my lifetime,
>> given their effects on the well being of the majority of people, Trump is
>> the worst. W. Bush is next in line. But Reagan started us on this road to
>> hell. Truman sinned against humanity by being responsible for dropping the
>> atom bombs and starting the cold war. So maybe he's the worst.
>>
>> Miriam
>>
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: blind-democracy-bounce@freelists.org
>> <blind-democracy-bounce@freelists.org> On Behalf Of Roger Loran Bailey
>> (Redacted sender "rogerbailey81" for DMARC)
>> Sent: Friday, March 29, 2019 3:04 PM
>> To: blind-democracy@freelists.org; Carl Jarvis <carjar82@gmail.com>
>> Subject: [blind-democracy] Re: Donald Trump
>>
>> I don't necessarily give a lot of credence to bourgeois presidential
>> historians because my class perspective is entirely different than theirs,
>> but, nevertheless, I understand that until now most presidential historians
>> named Herbert Hoover as the worst president ever. I have seen some articles
>> that now name Donald Trump as having supplanted that position.
>>
>> ---
>>
>> Carl Sagan
>> " The truth may be puzzling. It may take some work to grapple with. It may
>> be counterintuitive. It may contradict deeply held prejudices. It may not be
>> consonant with what we desperately want to be true. But our preferences do
>> not determine what's true. "
>> ― Carl Sagan
>>
>>
>> On 3/29/2019 12:59 AM, Carl Jarvis wrote:
>>> Mostafa wrote: "He's the worst president to ever operate in the oval
>>> office."
>>> Sorry Mostafa, Donald Trump is only one of a large number of corrupt,
>>> mentally unbalanced men to achieve the presidency.
>>> The United States of America has a violent history, which I will not
>>> go into here. But if you care to read a fairly objective and accurate
>>> account of the growth of this nation, read Howard Zinn's "A People's
>>> History of the United States". That Oval Office has seated some very
>>> honorable and honest men. But it has also seen corrupt and greedy and
>>> self serving men.
>>> Personally, I believe that the honest American, who cares about his
>>> people and about how we treat the people of the world, still outnumber
>>> the cheats and those who worship the Golden Calf.
>>> Carl Jarvis
>>>
>>>
>>> On 3/28/19, Roger Loran Bailey <dmarc-noreply@freelists.org> wrote:
>>>> Some states split their electoral votes. I think Nebraska is one. Or am
>>>> I thinking of another midwest state?
>>>>
>>>> ---
>>>>
>>>> Carl Sagan
>>>> " The truth may be puzzling. It may take some work to grapple with. It
>>>> may
>>>> be counterintuitive. It may contradict deeply held prejudices. It may not
>>>> be
>>>> consonant with what we desperately want to be true. But our preferences
>>>> do
>>>> not determine what's true. "
>>>> ― Carl Sagan
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> On 3/28/2019 10:07 PM, Miriam Vieni wrote:
>>>>> Mustafa,
>>>>>
>>>>> I'd like to correct one of the things you said. The majority of
>>>>> Americans
>>>>> did not elect Donald Trump. If the president were elected as he or she
>>>>> should be, by a majority of the votes cast, Hillary Clinton would have
>>>>> won
>>>>> the election. She received 3 million more votes than Mr. Trump. He
>>>>> became
>>>>> President in the same way that George W. Bush did. Their election was
>>>>> due
>>>>> to a mechanism called the electoral college. The electoral college was
>>>>> developed in order to deny the vote to the ordinary people. Each state
>>>>> is
>>>>> allotted a certain number of electoral votes. If the majority of the
>>>>> popular vote goes to the Republican party, for example, then all of the
>>>>> electoral votes in that particular state go to the presidential
>>>>> candidate.
>>>>> So if 51% of people in Michigan voted for Trump, he'd get all of the
>>>>> electoral votes, not 51% of them. He won because a few key states had a
>>>>> majority of Republican votes.
>>>>>
>>>>> There are many complicated reasons that explain why the US government
>>>>> is
>>>>> functioning as it is at this point. But in addition to all of the
>>>>> historical, sociological, and financial reasons, it is important to
>>>>> recognize that Donald J. Trump is a mentally, emotionally disabled man,
>>>>> who, along with having been dishonest and sheltered by his wealth from
>>>>> the
>>>>> consequences of his actions for all of his life, is not competent to
>>>>> undertake the tasks of the presidency.
>>>>>
>>>>> Miriam
>>>>>
>>>>> -----Original Message-----
>>>>> From: blind-democracy-bounce@freelists.org
>>>>> <blind-democracy-bounce@freelists.org> On Behalf Of Mostafa Almahdy
>>>>> Sent: Thursday, March 28, 2019 8:21 PM
>>>>> To: blind-democracy@freelists.org
>>>>> Subject: [blind-democracy] Donald Trump
>>>>>
>>>>> Well, although I am not American, I'd still like to join the discussion.
>>>>> I
>>>>> wonder, how would George Washington react if he encountered Donald
>>>>> Trump
>>>>> operating in the White House? I bet he would have gone mad. He would
>>>>> say,
>>>>> who has brought this hellion here? He won't imagine that the majority
>>>>> of
>>>>> Americans are the ones who did.
>>>>> Trump isn't himself the prob, he's just a tool that governs the
>>>>> corporal
>>>>> establishment and its material plethora. It is a system that aids the
>>>>> rich
>>>>> to constantly become richer and the poor shall constantly become
>>>>> poorer.
>>>>> As I decisively stated, the practice of lobbyism is the major factor by
>>>>> which law enforcement has been perfectly surmounted in the States.
>>>>> Everyone knew for sure that Trump is a horrific felon, even those who
>>>>> categorically defend him.
>>>>> Nonetheless, with the power of his copious wealth, he was able to
>>>>> either
>>>>> threaten or bribe the special council. Perhaps he has done both, who
>>>>> knows? As Cohen has somewhat purported in his testimonial to Congress,
>>>>> Trump is besieged by bunch of guardians including attorneys etc. He
>>>>> warned
>>>>> people that Trump doesn't care about allegiance. He'd rather pay people
>>>>> to
>>>>> protect him and to even lie for him if it is necessary. Right now,
>>>>> Trump
>>>>> thinks he is wholly protected. No one is higher than him to oppugn his
>>>>> deeds. Even congress is bought, and it amply complies to mr Trump
>>>>> demands.
>>>>> Donald Trump resembles the mass nescience of average Americans on a
>>>>> rather
>>>>> broader scale. They elected him after all. Many of them are seemingly
>>>>> in
>>>>> favour of his typical impudence and inapplicably crude remarks. Trump's
>>>>> disgraceful rhetoric is not aliened to us. He perennially clashed and
>>>>> expressed disapprobation of reporters asking him questions. He's just
>>>>> so
>>>>> petulant about that. Donald Trump is impeachably caged for explicitly
>>>>> uttering racism. He rudely mocked accents of people on stage. He spoke
>>>>> terms that are leastwise, quite abhorrent in essence. He easily
>>>>> mortifies
>>>>> major rivals. Now, who admitted this incompetent individual to act
>>>>> swaggeringly in Oval Office? Well, they're just some bunch of racists.
>>>>> They're just bunch of outrageous white supremacists who're mostly
>>>>> Protestants. They're merely bigots and hate provokers. They speak about
>>>>> Islam derogatorily. As they incessantly truckle to satisfy the Zionist
>>>>> camp, they relentlessly attempt to marginalise, denigrate and demonise
>>>>> Islam out of malice. This is how Donald Trump is unremittingly
>>>>> salvaged,
>>>>> despite his denotative commission of major offences. He works by and
>>>>> for
>>>>> the Zionist lobby and that's quite obvious. Donald Trump has plainly
>>>>> breached the longly chanted American principles of democracy, ethnic
>>>>> equality and the allegedly promoted prevention of racial disparity. He
>>>>> discourteously assaulted immigrants and people of darker complexion.
>>>>> He's
>>>>> the worst president to ever operate in oval office. Many people are so
>>>>> lenified with Trump's absonant disposal. They consider him somewhat
>>>>> their
>>>>> daddy. Well, he's basically a demagogue. If some of you aren't so
>>>>> familiar
>>>>> with this term, he is a political leader who seeks endorsement with
>>>>> appealing to popular passions and prejudices. This is exactly what
>>>>> Trump
>>>>> does. The nuance of longly proclaimed American fundamental principles
>>>>> has
>>>>> been utterly ruined in Trump's miserable era. However, there are
>>>>> Americans
>>>>> who're quite disappointed with Trump being unfortunately their
>>>>> president.
>>>>> I knew people who left the States shortly after election results have
>>>>> declared him winning the presidential race. Donald Trump doesn't
>>>>> necessarily represent many Americans. He neither doesn't represent the
>>>>> American dream. It is essentially based on genuinely practiced
>>>>> democratic
>>>>> tenets such as freedom of speech, freedom of embracement as well as
>>>>> defection of faith or notion. I knew people who felicitously live in
>>>>> the
>>>>> States with being Muslims. They never felt disparaged until Trump came.
>>>>> I
>>>>> personally am not so invoked to Americanism. Be that as it may, I do
>>>>> not
>>>>> criticise people for their dissension with me. I solely repudiate acts
>>>>> that are destined to diminish, slander or manipulate my identity. I
>>>>> communicate beautifully with people who do not come near my faith and
>>>>> heritage. I tolerate difference of opinion and belief. I at the same
>>>>> time
>>>>> won't ever neglect my conscience to gratify those of special agenda. It
>>>>> is
>>>>> significantly crucial to recognise that I wholly represent my culture
>>>>> and
>>>>> identity and I am not prepared at any rate to alter that. Thank you for
>>>>> reading, cordially.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>
>>
>>
---
Carl Sagan
" The truth may be puzzling. It may take some work to grapple with. It may be counterintuitive. It may contradict deeply held prejudices. It may not be consonant with what we desperately want to be true. But our preferences do not determine what's true. "
― Carl Sagan
On 3/29/2019 7:20 PM, Carl Jarvis wrote:
> Each of us could probably draw up our own "ten most horrible presidents" list.
> And with only a few exceptions, the lists would be different. Because
> the United States of America was a myth, a wonderful Fairy Tale of
> Once Upon a Time. The new nation's constitution was an amazing
> document, a model parroted by nations down through the years. But all
> of its freedoms and all of its human rights were not given to All of
> the People. This new document, as wonderful as it read, was meant
> only for the White, Male, Landed Gentry. The Working Class, which was
> most of the remaining population, had to fight constantly in order to
> have access to any of those "Inalienable Rights" set down in the
> Constitution. Since the men, all White up until Barack Obama took
> office some 238 years later, were owned by that Oligarchy, including
> Obama, the selection of presidential candidates was restricted to a
> very specific group of right-minded men.
> Despite the wide variety of surface differences, these men all passed
> the approval of those they would serve. On my "Most Horrible" list I
> place Andrew Jackson high. Jackson was a cold, heartless Racist of
> the First Order. But Andrew Johnson had to be elbowing his way toward
> the top spot, too. Grant was incompetent and so was Harding...as well
> as being a womanizer and a crook. Wilson and Truman were "Chicken
> Hawks" as well as Racists. Even the great FDR was a mixed bag,
> playing footsie with the Dixicrats and his dealings with the Americans
> of Japanese descent. Kennedy was a pretty boy womanizer, along with
> Clinton. Nixon was a Traitor and a liar, and Reagan was pressed so
> closely to the backside of the wealthy elite that his lips were a
> permanent brown. The first Bush was a kinder gentler mass murderer
> and his son was an idiot mass murderer(apologies to kind, sane, decent
> idiots).
> Bill Clinton, like Barack Obama, learned to play ball with the
> Establishment. Their major difference was that Bill was/is a big time
> womanizer, and Obama is...well...is a "compromiser".
> This brings me to Donald Trump, and I'm already about 4 or 5 over my
> allotted ten. But that's alright, because Donald Trump, despite the
> massess of media coverage he receives, is a run of the mill
> professional chiseler. He comes in all colors and fancy clothes. He
> smirks at you as he sizes up your total worth. He will cheat, or give
> generously...although he can give without giving. Donald Trump is the
> poster boy for the New Successful American. Donald Trump is all the
> things we are told that we value.
> What do you think? Look like a picture of you?
>
> Carl Jarvis
>
> On 3/29/19, Miriam Vieni <miriamvieni@optonline.net> wrote:
>> I'm not sure I care about historians, nor do I care about Marxist theory
>> when it comes to judging presidents. and I think we need to judge what we
>> have on the basis of the reality in which we find ourselves. In my lifetime,
>> given their effects on the well being of the majority of people, Trump is
>> the worst. W. Bush is next in line. But Reagan started us on this road to
>> hell. Truman sinned against humanity by being responsible for dropping the
>> atom bombs and starting the cold war. So maybe he's the worst.
>>
>> Miriam
>>
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: blind-democracy-bounce@freelists.org
>> <blind-democracy-bounce@freelists.org> On Behalf Of Roger Loran Bailey
>> (Redacted sender "rogerbailey81" for DMARC)
>> Sent: Friday, March 29, 2019 3:04 PM
>> To: blind-democracy@freelists.org; Carl Jarvis <carjar82@gmail.com>
>> Subject: [blind-democracy] Re: Donald Trump
>>
>> I don't necessarily give a lot of credence to bourgeois presidential
>> historians because my class perspective is entirely different than theirs,
>> but, nevertheless, I understand that until now most presidential historians
>> named Herbert Hoover as the worst president ever. I have seen some articles
>> that now name Donald Trump as having supplanted that position.
>>
>> ---
>>
>> Carl Sagan
>> " The truth may be puzzling. It may take some work to grapple with. It may
>> be counterintuitive. It may contradict deeply held prejudices. It may not be
>> consonant with what we desperately want to be true. But our preferences do
>> not determine what's true. "
>> ― Carl Sagan
>>
>>
>> On 3/29/2019 12:59 AM, Carl Jarvis wrote:
>>> Mostafa wrote: "He's the worst president to ever operate in the oval
>>> office."
>>> Sorry Mostafa, Donald Trump is only one of a large number of corrupt,
>>> mentally unbalanced men to achieve the presidency.
>>> The United States of America has a violent history, which I will not
>>> go into here. But if you care to read a fairly objective and accurate
>>> account of the growth of this nation, read Howard Zinn's "A People's
>>> History of the United States". That Oval Office has seated some very
>>> honorable and honest men. But it has also seen corrupt and greedy and
>>> self serving men.
>>> Personally, I believe that the honest American, who cares about his
>>> people and about how we treat the people of the world, still outnumber
>>> the cheats and those who worship the Golden Calf.
>>> Carl Jarvis
>>>
>>>
>>> On 3/28/19, Roger Loran Bailey <dmarc-noreply@freelists.org> wrote:
>>>> Some states split their electoral votes. I think Nebraska is one. Or am
>>>> I thinking of another midwest state?
>>>>
>>>> ---
>>>>
>>>> Carl Sagan
>>>> " The truth may be puzzling. It may take some work to grapple with. It
>>>> may
>>>> be counterintuitive. It may contradict deeply held prejudices. It may not
>>>> be
>>>> consonant with what we desperately want to be true. But our preferences
>>>> do
>>>> not determine what's true. "
>>>> ― Carl Sagan
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> On 3/28/2019 10:07 PM, Miriam Vieni wrote:
>>>>> Mustafa,
>>>>>
>>>>> I'd like to correct one of the things you said. The majority of
>>>>> Americans
>>>>> did not elect Donald Trump. If the president were elected as he or she
>>>>> should be, by a majority of the votes cast, Hillary Clinton would have
>>>>> won
>>>>> the election. She received 3 million more votes than Mr. Trump. He
>>>>> became
>>>>> President in the same way that George W. Bush did. Their election was
>>>>> due
>>>>> to a mechanism called the electoral college. The electoral college was
>>>>> developed in order to deny the vote to the ordinary people. Each state
>>>>> is
>>>>> allotted a certain number of electoral votes. If the majority of the
>>>>> popular vote goes to the Republican party, for example, then all of the
>>>>> electoral votes in that particular state go to the presidential
>>>>> candidate.
>>>>> So if 51% of people in Michigan voted for Trump, he'd get all of the
>>>>> electoral votes, not 51% of them. He won because a few key states had a
>>>>> majority of Republican votes.
>>>>>
>>>>> There are many complicated reasons that explain why the US government
>>>>> is
>>>>> functioning as it is at this point. But in addition to all of the
>>>>> historical, sociological, and financial reasons, it is important to
>>>>> recognize that Donald J. Trump is a mentally, emotionally disabled man,
>>>>> who, along with having been dishonest and sheltered by his wealth from
>>>>> the
>>>>> consequences of his actions for all of his life, is not competent to
>>>>> undertake the tasks of the presidency.
>>>>>
>>>>> Miriam
>>>>>
>>>>> -----Original Message-----
>>>>> From: blind-democracy-bounce@freelists.org
>>>>> <blind-democracy-bounce@freelists.org> On Behalf Of Mostafa Almahdy
>>>>> Sent: Thursday, March 28, 2019 8:21 PM
>>>>> To: blind-democracy@freelists.org
>>>>> Subject: [blind-democracy] Donald Trump
>>>>>
>>>>> Well, although I am not American, I'd still like to join the discussion.
>>>>> I
>>>>> wonder, how would George Washington react if he encountered Donald
>>>>> Trump
>>>>> operating in the White House? I bet he would have gone mad. He would
>>>>> say,
>>>>> who has brought this hellion here? He won't imagine that the majority
>>>>> of
>>>>> Americans are the ones who did.
>>>>> Trump isn't himself the prob, he's just a tool that governs the
>>>>> corporal
>>>>> establishment and its material plethora. It is a system that aids the
>>>>> rich
>>>>> to constantly become richer and the poor shall constantly become
>>>>> poorer.
>>>>> As I decisively stated, the practice of lobbyism is the major factor by
>>>>> which law enforcement has been perfectly surmounted in the States.
>>>>> Everyone knew for sure that Trump is a horrific felon, even those who
>>>>> categorically defend him.
>>>>> Nonetheless, with the power of his copious wealth, he was able to
>>>>> either
>>>>> threaten or bribe the special council. Perhaps he has done both, who
>>>>> knows? As Cohen has somewhat purported in his testimonial to Congress,
>>>>> Trump is besieged by bunch of guardians including attorneys etc. He
>>>>> warned
>>>>> people that Trump doesn't care about allegiance. He'd rather pay people
>>>>> to
>>>>> protect him and to even lie for him if it is necessary. Right now,
>>>>> Trump
>>>>> thinks he is wholly protected. No one is higher than him to oppugn his
>>>>> deeds. Even congress is bought, and it amply complies to mr Trump
>>>>> demands.
>>>>> Donald Trump resembles the mass nescience of average Americans on a
>>>>> rather
>>>>> broader scale. They elected him after all. Many of them are seemingly
>>>>> in
>>>>> favour of his typical impudence and inapplicably crude remarks. Trump's
>>>>> disgraceful rhetoric is not aliened to us. He perennially clashed and
>>>>> expressed disapprobation of reporters asking him questions. He's just
>>>>> so
>>>>> petulant about that. Donald Trump is impeachably caged for explicitly
>>>>> uttering racism. He rudely mocked accents of people on stage. He spoke
>>>>> terms that are leastwise, quite abhorrent in essence. He easily
>>>>> mortifies
>>>>> major rivals. Now, who admitted this incompetent individual to act
>>>>> swaggeringly in Oval Office? Well, they're just some bunch of racists.
>>>>> They're just bunch of outrageous white supremacists who're mostly
>>>>> Protestants. They're merely bigots and hate provokers. They speak about
>>>>> Islam derogatorily. As they incessantly truckle to satisfy the Zionist
>>>>> camp, they relentlessly attempt to marginalise, denigrate and demonise
>>>>> Islam out of malice. This is how Donald Trump is unremittingly
>>>>> salvaged,
>>>>> despite his denotative commission of major offences. He works by and
>>>>> for
>>>>> the Zionist lobby and that's quite obvious. Donald Trump has plainly
>>>>> breached the longly chanted American principles of democracy, ethnic
>>>>> equality and the allegedly promoted prevention of racial disparity. He
>>>>> discourteously assaulted immigrants and people of darker complexion.
>>>>> He's
>>>>> the worst president to ever operate in oval office. Many people are so
>>>>> lenified with Trump's absonant disposal. They consider him somewhat
>>>>> their
>>>>> daddy. Well, he's basically a demagogue. If some of you aren't so
>>>>> familiar
>>>>> with this term, he is a political leader who seeks endorsement with
>>>>> appealing to popular passions and prejudices. This is exactly what
>>>>> Trump
>>>>> does. The nuance of longly proclaimed American fundamental principles
>>>>> has
>>>>> been utterly ruined in Trump's miserable era. However, there are
>>>>> Americans
>>>>> who're quite disappointed with Trump being unfortunately their
>>>>> president.
>>>>> I knew people who left the States shortly after election results have
>>>>> declared him winning the presidential race. Donald Trump doesn't
>>>>> necessarily represent many Americans. He neither doesn't represent the
>>>>> American dream. It is essentially based on genuinely practiced
>>>>> democratic
>>>>> tenets such as freedom of speech, freedom of embracement as well as
>>>>> defection of faith or notion. I knew people who felicitously live in
>>>>> the
>>>>> States with being Muslims. They never felt disparaged until Trump came.
>>>>> I
>>>>> personally am not so invoked to Americanism. Be that as it may, I do
>>>>> not
>>>>> criticise people for their dissension with me. I solely repudiate acts
>>>>> that are destined to diminish, slander or manipulate my identity. I
>>>>> communicate beautifully with people who do not come near my faith and
>>>>> heritage. I tolerate difference of opinion and belief. I at the same
>>>>> time
>>>>> won't ever neglect my conscience to gratify those of special agenda. It
>>>>> is
>>>>> significantly crucial to recognise that I wholly represent my culture
>>>>> and
>>>>> identity and I am not prepared at any rate to alter that. Thank you for
>>>>> reading, cordially.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>
>>
>>
Re: [blind-democracy] Re: Donald Trump
Each of us could probably draw up our own "ten most horrible presidents" list.
And with only a few exceptions, the lists would be different. Because
the United States of America was a myth, a wonderful Fairy Tale of
Once Upon a Time. The new nation's constitution was an amazing
document, a model parroted by nations down through the years. But all
of its freedoms and all of its human rights were not given to All of
the People. This new document, as wonderful as it read, was meant
only for the White, Male, Landed Gentry. The Working Class, which was
most of the remaining population, had to fight constantly in order to
have access to any of those "Inalienable Rights" set down in the
Constitution. Since the men, all White up until Barack Obama took
office some 238 years later, were owned by that Oligarchy, including
Obama, the selection of presidential candidates was restricted to a
very specific group of right-minded men.
Despite the wide variety of surface differences, these men all passed
the approval of those they would serve. On my "Most Horrible" list I
place Andrew Jackson high. Jackson was a cold, heartless Racist of
the First Order. But Andrew Johnson had to be elbowing his way toward
the top spot, too. Grant was incompetent and so was Harding...as well
as being a womanizer and a crook. Wilson and Truman were "Chicken
Hawks" as well as Racists. Even the great FDR was a mixed bag,
playing footsie with the Dixicrats and his dealings with the Americans
of Japanese descent. Kennedy was a pretty boy womanizer, along with
Clinton. Nixon was a Traitor and a liar, and Reagan was pressed so
closely to the backside of the wealthy elite that his lips were a
permanent brown. The first Bush was a kinder gentler mass murderer
and his son was an idiot mass murderer(apologies to kind, sane, decent
idiots).
Bill Clinton, like Barack Obama, learned to play ball with the
Establishment. Their major difference was that Bill was/is a big time
womanizer, and Obama is...well...is a "compromiser".
This brings me to Donald Trump, and I'm already about 4 or 5 over my
allotted ten. But that's alright, because Donald Trump, despite the
massess of media coverage he receives, is a run of the mill
professional chiseler. He comes in all colors and fancy clothes. He
smirks at you as he sizes up your total worth. He will cheat, or give
generously...although he can give without giving. Donald Trump is the
poster boy for the New Successful American. Donald Trump is all the
things we are told that we value.
What do you think? Look like a picture of you?
Carl Jarvis
On 3/29/19, Miriam Vieni <miriamvieni@optonline.net> wrote:
> I'm not sure I care about historians, nor do I care about Marxist theory
> when it comes to judging presidents. and I think we need to judge what we
> have on the basis of the reality in which we find ourselves. In my lifetime,
> given their effects on the well being of the majority of people, Trump is
> the worst. W. Bush is next in line. But Reagan started us on this road to
> hell. Truman sinned against humanity by being responsible for dropping the
> atom bombs and starting the cold war. So maybe he's the worst.
>
> Miriam
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: blind-democracy-bounce@freelists.org
> <blind-democracy-bounce@freelists.org> On Behalf Of Roger Loran Bailey
> (Redacted sender "rogerbailey81" for DMARC)
> Sent: Friday, March 29, 2019 3:04 PM
> To: blind-democracy@freelists.org; Carl Jarvis <carjar82@gmail.com>
> Subject: [blind-democracy] Re: Donald Trump
>
> I don't necessarily give a lot of credence to bourgeois presidential
> historians because my class perspective is entirely different than theirs,
> but, nevertheless, I understand that until now most presidential historians
> named Herbert Hoover as the worst president ever. I have seen some articles
> that now name Donald Trump as having supplanted that position.
>
> ---
>
> Carl Sagan
> " The truth may be puzzling. It may take some work to grapple with. It may
> be counterintuitive. It may contradict deeply held prejudices. It may not be
> consonant with what we desperately want to be true. But our preferences do
> not determine what's true. "
> ― Carl Sagan
>
>
> On 3/29/2019 12:59 AM, Carl Jarvis wrote:
>> Mostafa wrote: "He's the worst president to ever operate in the oval
>> office."
>> Sorry Mostafa, Donald Trump is only one of a large number of corrupt,
>> mentally unbalanced men to achieve the presidency.
>> The United States of America has a violent history, which I will not
>> go into here. But if you care to read a fairly objective and accurate
>> account of the growth of this nation, read Howard Zinn's "A People's
>> History of the United States". That Oval Office has seated some very
>> honorable and honest men. But it has also seen corrupt and greedy and
>> self serving men.
>> Personally, I believe that the honest American, who cares about his
>> people and about how we treat the people of the world, still outnumber
>> the cheats and those who worship the Golden Calf.
>> Carl Jarvis
>>
>>
>> On 3/28/19, Roger Loran Bailey <dmarc-noreply@freelists.org> wrote:
>>> Some states split their electoral votes. I think Nebraska is one. Or am
>>> I thinking of another midwest state?
>>>
>>> ---
>>>
>>> Carl Sagan
>>> " The truth may be puzzling. It may take some work to grapple with. It
>>> may
>>> be counterintuitive. It may contradict deeply held prejudices. It may not
>>> be
>>> consonant with what we desperately want to be true. But our preferences
>>> do
>>> not determine what's true. "
>>> ― Carl Sagan
>>>
>>>
>>> On 3/28/2019 10:07 PM, Miriam Vieni wrote:
>>>> Mustafa,
>>>>
>>>> I'd like to correct one of the things you said. The majority of
>>>> Americans
>>>> did not elect Donald Trump. If the president were elected as he or she
>>>> should be, by a majority of the votes cast, Hillary Clinton would have
>>>> won
>>>> the election. She received 3 million more votes than Mr. Trump. He
>>>> became
>>>> President in the same way that George W. Bush did. Their election was
>>>> due
>>>> to a mechanism called the electoral college. The electoral college was
>>>> developed in order to deny the vote to the ordinary people. Each state
>>>> is
>>>> allotted a certain number of electoral votes. If the majority of the
>>>> popular vote goes to the Republican party, for example, then all of the
>>>> electoral votes in that particular state go to the presidential
>>>> candidate.
>>>> So if 51% of people in Michigan voted for Trump, he'd get all of the
>>>> electoral votes, not 51% of them. He won because a few key states had a
>>>> majority of Republican votes.
>>>>
>>>> There are many complicated reasons that explain why the US government
>>>> is
>>>> functioning as it is at this point. But in addition to all of the
>>>> historical, sociological, and financial reasons, it is important to
>>>> recognize that Donald J. Trump is a mentally, emotionally disabled man,
>>>> who, along with having been dishonest and sheltered by his wealth from
>>>> the
>>>> consequences of his actions for all of his life, is not competent to
>>>> undertake the tasks of the presidency.
>>>>
>>>> Miriam
>>>>
>>>> -----Original Message-----
>>>> From: blind-democracy-bounce@freelists.org
>>>> <blind-democracy-bounce@freelists.org> On Behalf Of Mostafa Almahdy
>>>> Sent: Thursday, March 28, 2019 8:21 PM
>>>> To: blind-democracy@freelists.org
>>>> Subject: [blind-democracy] Donald Trump
>>>>
>>>> Well, although I am not American, I'd still like to join the discussion.
>>>> I
>>>> wonder, how would George Washington react if he encountered Donald
>>>> Trump
>>>> operating in the White House? I bet he would have gone mad. He would
>>>> say,
>>>> who has brought this hellion here? He won't imagine that the majority
>>>> of
>>>> Americans are the ones who did.
>>>> Trump isn't himself the prob, he's just a tool that governs the
>>>> corporal
>>>> establishment and its material plethora. It is a system that aids the
>>>> rich
>>>> to constantly become richer and the poor shall constantly become
>>>> poorer.
>>>> As I decisively stated, the practice of lobbyism is the major factor by
>>>> which law enforcement has been perfectly surmounted in the States.
>>>> Everyone knew for sure that Trump is a horrific felon, even those who
>>>> categorically defend him.
>>>> Nonetheless, with the power of his copious wealth, he was able to
>>>> either
>>>> threaten or bribe the special council. Perhaps he has done both, who
>>>> knows? As Cohen has somewhat purported in his testimonial to Congress,
>>>> Trump is besieged by bunch of guardians including attorneys etc. He
>>>> warned
>>>> people that Trump doesn't care about allegiance. He'd rather pay people
>>>> to
>>>> protect him and to even lie for him if it is necessary. Right now,
>>>> Trump
>>>> thinks he is wholly protected. No one is higher than him to oppugn his
>>>> deeds. Even congress is bought, and it amply complies to mr Trump
>>>> demands.
>>>> Donald Trump resembles the mass nescience of average Americans on a
>>>> rather
>>>> broader scale. They elected him after all. Many of them are seemingly
>>>> in
>>>> favour of his typical impudence and inapplicably crude remarks. Trump's
>>>> disgraceful rhetoric is not aliened to us. He perennially clashed and
>>>> expressed disapprobation of reporters asking him questions. He's just
>>>> so
>>>> petulant about that. Donald Trump is impeachably caged for explicitly
>>>> uttering racism. He rudely mocked accents of people on stage. He spoke
>>>> terms that are leastwise, quite abhorrent in essence. He easily
>>>> mortifies
>>>> major rivals. Now, who admitted this incompetent individual to act
>>>> swaggeringly in Oval Office? Well, they're just some bunch of racists.
>>>> They're just bunch of outrageous white supremacists who're mostly
>>>> Protestants. They're merely bigots and hate provokers. They speak about
>>>> Islam derogatorily. As they incessantly truckle to satisfy the Zionist
>>>> camp, they relentlessly attempt to marginalise, denigrate and demonise
>>>> Islam out of malice. This is how Donald Trump is unremittingly
>>>> salvaged,
>>>> despite his denotative commission of major offences. He works by and
>>>> for
>>>> the Zionist lobby and that's quite obvious. Donald Trump has plainly
>>>> breached the longly chanted American principles of democracy, ethnic
>>>> equality and the allegedly promoted prevention of racial disparity. He
>>>> discourteously assaulted immigrants and people of darker complexion.
>>>> He's
>>>> the worst president to ever operate in oval office. Many people are so
>>>> lenified with Trump's absonant disposal. They consider him somewhat
>>>> their
>>>> daddy. Well, he's basically a demagogue. If some of you aren't so
>>>> familiar
>>>> with this term, he is a political leader who seeks endorsement with
>>>> appealing to popular passions and prejudices. This is exactly what
>>>> Trump
>>>> does. The nuance of longly proclaimed American fundamental principles
>>>> has
>>>> been utterly ruined in Trump's miserable era. However, there are
>>>> Americans
>>>> who're quite disappointed with Trump being unfortunately their
>>>> president.
>>>> I knew people who left the States shortly after election results have
>>>> declared him winning the presidential race. Donald Trump doesn't
>>>> necessarily represent many Americans. He neither doesn't represent the
>>>> American dream. It is essentially based on genuinely practiced
>>>> democratic
>>>> tenets such as freedom of speech, freedom of embracement as well as
>>>> defection of faith or notion. I knew people who felicitously live in
>>>> the
>>>> States with being Muslims. They never felt disparaged until Trump came.
>>>> I
>>>> personally am not so invoked to Americanism. Be that as it may, I do
>>>> not
>>>> criticise people for their dissension with me. I solely repudiate acts
>>>> that are destined to diminish, slander or manipulate my identity. I
>>>> communicate beautifully with people who do not come near my faith and
>>>> heritage. I tolerate difference of opinion and belief. I at the same
>>>> time
>>>> won't ever neglect my conscience to gratify those of special agenda. It
>>>> is
>>>> significantly crucial to recognise that I wholly represent my culture
>>>> and
>>>> identity and I am not prepared at any rate to alter that. Thank you for
>>>> reading, cordially.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>>
>
>
>
And with only a few exceptions, the lists would be different. Because
the United States of America was a myth, a wonderful Fairy Tale of
Once Upon a Time. The new nation's constitution was an amazing
document, a model parroted by nations down through the years. But all
of its freedoms and all of its human rights were not given to All of
the People. This new document, as wonderful as it read, was meant
only for the White, Male, Landed Gentry. The Working Class, which was
most of the remaining population, had to fight constantly in order to
have access to any of those "Inalienable Rights" set down in the
Constitution. Since the men, all White up until Barack Obama took
office some 238 years later, were owned by that Oligarchy, including
Obama, the selection of presidential candidates was restricted to a
very specific group of right-minded men.
Despite the wide variety of surface differences, these men all passed
the approval of those they would serve. On my "Most Horrible" list I
place Andrew Jackson high. Jackson was a cold, heartless Racist of
the First Order. But Andrew Johnson had to be elbowing his way toward
the top spot, too. Grant was incompetent and so was Harding...as well
as being a womanizer and a crook. Wilson and Truman were "Chicken
Hawks" as well as Racists. Even the great FDR was a mixed bag,
playing footsie with the Dixicrats and his dealings with the Americans
of Japanese descent. Kennedy was a pretty boy womanizer, along with
Clinton. Nixon was a Traitor and a liar, and Reagan was pressed so
closely to the backside of the wealthy elite that his lips were a
permanent brown. The first Bush was a kinder gentler mass murderer
and his son was an idiot mass murderer(apologies to kind, sane, decent
idiots).
Bill Clinton, like Barack Obama, learned to play ball with the
Establishment. Their major difference was that Bill was/is a big time
womanizer, and Obama is...well...is a "compromiser".
This brings me to Donald Trump, and I'm already about 4 or 5 over my
allotted ten. But that's alright, because Donald Trump, despite the
massess of media coverage he receives, is a run of the mill
professional chiseler. He comes in all colors and fancy clothes. He
smirks at you as he sizes up your total worth. He will cheat, or give
generously...although he can give without giving. Donald Trump is the
poster boy for the New Successful American. Donald Trump is all the
things we are told that we value.
What do you think? Look like a picture of you?
Carl Jarvis
On 3/29/19, Miriam Vieni <miriamvieni@optonline.net> wrote:
> I'm not sure I care about historians, nor do I care about Marxist theory
> when it comes to judging presidents. and I think we need to judge what we
> have on the basis of the reality in which we find ourselves. In my lifetime,
> given their effects on the well being of the majority of people, Trump is
> the worst. W. Bush is next in line. But Reagan started us on this road to
> hell. Truman sinned against humanity by being responsible for dropping the
> atom bombs and starting the cold war. So maybe he's the worst.
>
> Miriam
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: blind-democracy-bounce@freelists.org
> <blind-democracy-bounce@freelists.org> On Behalf Of Roger Loran Bailey
> (Redacted sender "rogerbailey81" for DMARC)
> Sent: Friday, March 29, 2019 3:04 PM
> To: blind-democracy@freelists.org; Carl Jarvis <carjar82@gmail.com>
> Subject: [blind-democracy] Re: Donald Trump
>
> I don't necessarily give a lot of credence to bourgeois presidential
> historians because my class perspective is entirely different than theirs,
> but, nevertheless, I understand that until now most presidential historians
> named Herbert Hoover as the worst president ever. I have seen some articles
> that now name Donald Trump as having supplanted that position.
>
> ---
>
> Carl Sagan
> " The truth may be puzzling. It may take some work to grapple with. It may
> be counterintuitive. It may contradict deeply held prejudices. It may not be
> consonant with what we desperately want to be true. But our preferences do
> not determine what's true. "
> ― Carl Sagan
>
>
> On 3/29/2019 12:59 AM, Carl Jarvis wrote:
>> Mostafa wrote: "He's the worst president to ever operate in the oval
>> office."
>> Sorry Mostafa, Donald Trump is only one of a large number of corrupt,
>> mentally unbalanced men to achieve the presidency.
>> The United States of America has a violent history, which I will not
>> go into here. But if you care to read a fairly objective and accurate
>> account of the growth of this nation, read Howard Zinn's "A People's
>> History of the United States". That Oval Office has seated some very
>> honorable and honest men. But it has also seen corrupt and greedy and
>> self serving men.
>> Personally, I believe that the honest American, who cares about his
>> people and about how we treat the people of the world, still outnumber
>> the cheats and those who worship the Golden Calf.
>> Carl Jarvis
>>
>>
>> On 3/28/19, Roger Loran Bailey <dmarc-noreply@freelists.org> wrote:
>>> Some states split their electoral votes. I think Nebraska is one. Or am
>>> I thinking of another midwest state?
>>>
>>> ---
>>>
>>> Carl Sagan
>>> " The truth may be puzzling. It may take some work to grapple with. It
>>> may
>>> be counterintuitive. It may contradict deeply held prejudices. It may not
>>> be
>>> consonant with what we desperately want to be true. But our preferences
>>> do
>>> not determine what's true. "
>>> ― Carl Sagan
>>>
>>>
>>> On 3/28/2019 10:07 PM, Miriam Vieni wrote:
>>>> Mustafa,
>>>>
>>>> I'd like to correct one of the things you said. The majority of
>>>> Americans
>>>> did not elect Donald Trump. If the president were elected as he or she
>>>> should be, by a majority of the votes cast, Hillary Clinton would have
>>>> won
>>>> the election. She received 3 million more votes than Mr. Trump. He
>>>> became
>>>> President in the same way that George W. Bush did. Their election was
>>>> due
>>>> to a mechanism called the electoral college. The electoral college was
>>>> developed in order to deny the vote to the ordinary people. Each state
>>>> is
>>>> allotted a certain number of electoral votes. If the majority of the
>>>> popular vote goes to the Republican party, for example, then all of the
>>>> electoral votes in that particular state go to the presidential
>>>> candidate.
>>>> So if 51% of people in Michigan voted for Trump, he'd get all of the
>>>> electoral votes, not 51% of them. He won because a few key states had a
>>>> majority of Republican votes.
>>>>
>>>> There are many complicated reasons that explain why the US government
>>>> is
>>>> functioning as it is at this point. But in addition to all of the
>>>> historical, sociological, and financial reasons, it is important to
>>>> recognize that Donald J. Trump is a mentally, emotionally disabled man,
>>>> who, along with having been dishonest and sheltered by his wealth from
>>>> the
>>>> consequences of his actions for all of his life, is not competent to
>>>> undertake the tasks of the presidency.
>>>>
>>>> Miriam
>>>>
>>>> -----Original Message-----
>>>> From: blind-democracy-bounce@freelists.org
>>>> <blind-democracy-bounce@freelists.org> On Behalf Of Mostafa Almahdy
>>>> Sent: Thursday, March 28, 2019 8:21 PM
>>>> To: blind-democracy@freelists.org
>>>> Subject: [blind-democracy] Donald Trump
>>>>
>>>> Well, although I am not American, I'd still like to join the discussion.
>>>> I
>>>> wonder, how would George Washington react if he encountered Donald
>>>> Trump
>>>> operating in the White House? I bet he would have gone mad. He would
>>>> say,
>>>> who has brought this hellion here? He won't imagine that the majority
>>>> of
>>>> Americans are the ones who did.
>>>> Trump isn't himself the prob, he's just a tool that governs the
>>>> corporal
>>>> establishment and its material plethora. It is a system that aids the
>>>> rich
>>>> to constantly become richer and the poor shall constantly become
>>>> poorer.
>>>> As I decisively stated, the practice of lobbyism is the major factor by
>>>> which law enforcement has been perfectly surmounted in the States.
>>>> Everyone knew for sure that Trump is a horrific felon, even those who
>>>> categorically defend him.
>>>> Nonetheless, with the power of his copious wealth, he was able to
>>>> either
>>>> threaten or bribe the special council. Perhaps he has done both, who
>>>> knows? As Cohen has somewhat purported in his testimonial to Congress,
>>>> Trump is besieged by bunch of guardians including attorneys etc. He
>>>> warned
>>>> people that Trump doesn't care about allegiance. He'd rather pay people
>>>> to
>>>> protect him and to even lie for him if it is necessary. Right now,
>>>> Trump
>>>> thinks he is wholly protected. No one is higher than him to oppugn his
>>>> deeds. Even congress is bought, and it amply complies to mr Trump
>>>> demands.
>>>> Donald Trump resembles the mass nescience of average Americans on a
>>>> rather
>>>> broader scale. They elected him after all. Many of them are seemingly
>>>> in
>>>> favour of his typical impudence and inapplicably crude remarks. Trump's
>>>> disgraceful rhetoric is not aliened to us. He perennially clashed and
>>>> expressed disapprobation of reporters asking him questions. He's just
>>>> so
>>>> petulant about that. Donald Trump is impeachably caged for explicitly
>>>> uttering racism. He rudely mocked accents of people on stage. He spoke
>>>> terms that are leastwise, quite abhorrent in essence. He easily
>>>> mortifies
>>>> major rivals. Now, who admitted this incompetent individual to act
>>>> swaggeringly in Oval Office? Well, they're just some bunch of racists.
>>>> They're just bunch of outrageous white supremacists who're mostly
>>>> Protestants. They're merely bigots and hate provokers. They speak about
>>>> Islam derogatorily. As they incessantly truckle to satisfy the Zionist
>>>> camp, they relentlessly attempt to marginalise, denigrate and demonise
>>>> Islam out of malice. This is how Donald Trump is unremittingly
>>>> salvaged,
>>>> despite his denotative commission of major offences. He works by and
>>>> for
>>>> the Zionist lobby and that's quite obvious. Donald Trump has plainly
>>>> breached the longly chanted American principles of democracy, ethnic
>>>> equality and the allegedly promoted prevention of racial disparity. He
>>>> discourteously assaulted immigrants and people of darker complexion.
>>>> He's
>>>> the worst president to ever operate in oval office. Many people are so
>>>> lenified with Trump's absonant disposal. They consider him somewhat
>>>> their
>>>> daddy. Well, he's basically a demagogue. If some of you aren't so
>>>> familiar
>>>> with this term, he is a political leader who seeks endorsement with
>>>> appealing to popular passions and prejudices. This is exactly what
>>>> Trump
>>>> does. The nuance of longly proclaimed American fundamental principles
>>>> has
>>>> been utterly ruined in Trump's miserable era. However, there are
>>>> Americans
>>>> who're quite disappointed with Trump being unfortunately their
>>>> president.
>>>> I knew people who left the States shortly after election results have
>>>> declared him winning the presidential race. Donald Trump doesn't
>>>> necessarily represent many Americans. He neither doesn't represent the
>>>> American dream. It is essentially based on genuinely practiced
>>>> democratic
>>>> tenets such as freedom of speech, freedom of embracement as well as
>>>> defection of faith or notion. I knew people who felicitously live in
>>>> the
>>>> States with being Muslims. They never felt disparaged until Trump came.
>>>> I
>>>> personally am not so invoked to Americanism. Be that as it may, I do
>>>> not
>>>> criticise people for their dissension with me. I solely repudiate acts
>>>> that are destined to diminish, slander or manipulate my identity. I
>>>> communicate beautifully with people who do not come near my faith and
>>>> heritage. I tolerate difference of opinion and belief. I at the same
>>>> time
>>>> won't ever neglect my conscience to gratify those of special agenda. It
>>>> is
>>>> significantly crucial to recognise that I wholly represent my culture
>>>> and
>>>> identity and I am not prepared at any rate to alter that. Thank you for
>>>> reading, cordially.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>>
>
>
>
Thursday, March 28, 2019
from democracy now, march 27, 2019
Are we finally going for the head of a problem, rather than tackling
the tail? Greed has driven a corporation that produces drugs which
can benefit many who suffer from intense pain, into a headlong push
for more profit and more control.
As you glance through the following excerpt from Democracy Now, keep
in mind that there are those who do need serious pain medications in
order to function. This exposure does not make life any easier for
them.
Carl Jarvis
As Oklahoma and Purdue Pharma reach a landmark settlement, we look at
an underreported result of the opioid crisis: the underprescribing of
opioids for
patients who rely on them for pain management. This month, more than
300 doctors and medical researchers sent an open letter to the Centers
for Disease
Control and Prevention warning patients have been harmed by a lack of
clarity in guidelines for prescribing opioids. The CDC revised the
guidelines for
primary care physicians in 2016 in order to improve safety and reduce
risks associated with long-term opioid therapy for chronic pain. But
many say the
new guidelines caused confusion and led to the reduction or
discontinuation of opioids for people who responsibly use the
medication to manage pain related
to cancer, multiple sclerosis, lupus and fibromyalgia. We speak with
Terri Lewis, a social scientist, rehabilitation practitioner and
clinical educator
who is running a national survey of patients and physicians to
calculate the impacts of changes in chronic pain treatment. We also
speak with Barry Meier,
the author of "Pain Killer: An Empire of Deceit and the Origin of
America's Opioid Epidemic." He was the first journalist to shine a
national spotlight
on the abuse of OxyContin.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Transcript
This is a rush transcript. Copy may not be in its final form.
AMY GOODMAN: This is Democracy Now!, as we turn now, end the show, by
looking at the flipside of the opioid crisis: the underprescribing of
opioids for
patients who rely on them for pain management. This month more than
300 doctors and medical researchers sent an
open letter
to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, the CDC, that
warns patients have been harmed by a lack of clarity in guidelines for
prescribing opioids.
The CDC revised the guidelines for primary care physicians in 2016 in
order to improve safety and reduce risks associated with long-term
opioid therapy
for chronic pain. But many say the new guidelines caused confusion and
led to the reduction or discontinuation of opioids for people who
responsibly use
the medication to manage pain related to cancer, multiple sclerosis,
lupus, fibromyalgia. A survey by the Pain News Network found more than
85 percent
of patients say the CDC's guidelines have made their pain and quality
of life worse. Almost half those surveyed said the poor management of
their pain
prompted them to consider suicide.
For more, we're joined by Terri Lewis, social scientist,
rehabilitation practitioner, clinical educator, who's running a
national survey of patients and
physicians to calculate the impacts of changes in chronic pain treatment.
Welcome to Democracy Now!, Terri. Can you explain this flipside?
People might be congratulating the CDC by saying that prescriptions
must be much lower.
But talk about what is happening for people who are not addicted but
need serious pain management.
TERRI LEWIS: Well, the bottom line is that the CDC guidelines were
written for primary care, for new cases of illness and injury, and
they were designed
to prevent addiction from developing by not creating new people who
were going to have a problem. The problem that we're seeing is that
these guidelines
have been adopted and Incorporated into federal and state regulations
in a way that they were never intended to. And we have characteristics
in our population
that we haven't accounted for in this design. We've got an aging
population. We've got an existing, multiply chronic care population
that is on the books.
These are people who are stable or have been stable in care, and they
are no longer getting the care that they need, because we have applied
and adopted
a one-size-fits-all policy, a square peg in a round hole. And we're
seeing that problem develops in creating structural barriers
throughout the whole care
system.
AMY GOODMAN: So people are losing the ability to have their drugs paid
by insurance. What role do pharmacies play in this?
TERRI LEWIS: Pharmacies are enrolled in insurer networks. Their job is
to be a party to the dispensing decision that is made for people who
live both in
urban environments and rural environments. As the DEA reduces the
available supplies, the job of the pharmacist is now to parse and
determine who is a
legitimate patient at the dispensing end versus who is not, and,
secondarily, to determine who's a reliable, legitimate prescriber and
who is not. And
that is a new role for pharmacists.
AMY GOODMAN: I want to go to former Attorney General Jeff Sessions
speaking in February of last year about the opioid crisis.
block quote
ATTORNEY GENERAL JEFF SESSIONS: We need to stop addiction. The plain
fact is, I believe, and I am operating on the assumption, that this
country prescribes
too many opioids. I mean, people need to take some aspirin sometimes
and tough it out a little. That's what General Kelly—you know, he's a
marine. He had
a surgery on his hand. It was a painful surgery. He said, "I'm not
taking any drugs." It did hurt, though. He did admit it hurt. But, I
mean, a lot of
people, you can get through these things.
block quote end
AMY GOODMAN: So, that's Jeff Sessions saying, "Just take some
aspirin." I want to bring Barry Meier back into the conversation,
author of Pain Killer:
An Empire of Deceit and the Origin of America's Opioid Epidemic. What
about this flipside, the people who desperately need chronic pain
management, and
now they're not—they're losing their insurance for these drugs?
BARRY MEIER: Well, you know, the management of pain is an extremely
complicated issue. And I agree with what Ms. Lewis said about there
being a need for
those patients to receive appropriate treatment. Appropriate
treatment, however, doesn't necessarily mean opioids. That's not—one
doesn't equal the other.
I think what doctors, what medical institutions are trying to do are
use other technologies, other means of managing pain, other than
opioids. And the
successful application of those strategies has great value for
patients in pain, because while we focus a lot on addiction, there are
other serious health
consequences to the long-term use of high doses of opioids. They have
a range of side effects that patients would be well to be without. So,
I think what
we need to see and encourage is an evolution in pain management. And I
think pain patients are a critical part of that evolution.
AMY GOODMAN: Terri Lewis, can you respond to Barry Meier?
TERRI LEWIS: Yes, I'd like to. First of all, I've been surveying this
population since 2012. The majority of people that we're concerned
about are people
with six or more chronic comorbid conditions. These are people who
have been folded up in car wrecks by freight trucks. They have
multiple progressive
diseases that are not going to get better. By denying care at this
level without a replacement system, we are denying people treatment.
We do not have
replacement treatment to deal with the kinds of problems that these
folks have. Nor do we have payment systems and physicians trained to
provide the care
that is needed, both in urban and rural America, to serve this
population. So, it's a little naive to suggest that grandma, who is
82, who is dealing with
not only Alzheimer's, but also lupus and rheumatoid arthritis, is
going to benefit from yoga and exercise. We have a very diverse,
complex problem. There
are at least four populations of pain patients in this problem. And we
need to get the data right.
AMY GOODMAN: Last comment, Barry Meier?
BARRY MEIER: Well, I think that we have experienced a huge public
health problem. Part of it has to do with the overprescribing of
opioids—the overprescribing
of opioids for patients who could benefit from other treatments. There
are certainly patients that require and deserve these drugs. But for
back pain,
dental pain, the panoply of problems for which Purdue and others
promoted this drug, that laid the seeds for what is the biggest health
crisis we are now
facing.
AMY GOODMAN: Well, I want to thank you both for being with us, Barry
Meier, author of Pain Killer: An Empire of Deceit and the Origin of
America's Opioid
Epidemic, and Terri Lewis, social scientist, rehabilitation
practitioner, who's running a national survey of patients and
physicians to calculate the impacts
of changes in chronic pain treatment.
the tail? Greed has driven a corporation that produces drugs which
can benefit many who suffer from intense pain, into a headlong push
for more profit and more control.
As you glance through the following excerpt from Democracy Now, keep
in mind that there are those who do need serious pain medications in
order to function. This exposure does not make life any easier for
them.
Carl Jarvis
As Oklahoma and Purdue Pharma reach a landmark settlement, we look at
an underreported result of the opioid crisis: the underprescribing of
opioids for
patients who rely on them for pain management. This month, more than
300 doctors and medical researchers sent an open letter to the Centers
for Disease
Control and Prevention warning patients have been harmed by a lack of
clarity in guidelines for prescribing opioids. The CDC revised the
guidelines for
primary care physicians in 2016 in order to improve safety and reduce
risks associated with long-term opioid therapy for chronic pain. But
many say the
new guidelines caused confusion and led to the reduction or
discontinuation of opioids for people who responsibly use the
medication to manage pain related
to cancer, multiple sclerosis, lupus and fibromyalgia. We speak with
Terri Lewis, a social scientist, rehabilitation practitioner and
clinical educator
who is running a national survey of patients and physicians to
calculate the impacts of changes in chronic pain treatment. We also
speak with Barry Meier,
the author of "Pain Killer: An Empire of Deceit and the Origin of
America's Opioid Epidemic." He was the first journalist to shine a
national spotlight
on the abuse of OxyContin.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Transcript
This is a rush transcript. Copy may not be in its final form.
AMY GOODMAN: This is Democracy Now!, as we turn now, end the show, by
looking at the flipside of the opioid crisis: the underprescribing of
opioids for
patients who rely on them for pain management. This month more than
300 doctors and medical researchers sent an
open letter
to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, the CDC, that
warns patients have been harmed by a lack of clarity in guidelines for
prescribing opioids.
The CDC revised the guidelines for primary care physicians in 2016 in
order to improve safety and reduce risks associated with long-term
opioid therapy
for chronic pain. But many say the new guidelines caused confusion and
led to the reduction or discontinuation of opioids for people who
responsibly use
the medication to manage pain related to cancer, multiple sclerosis,
lupus, fibromyalgia. A survey by the Pain News Network found more than
85 percent
of patients say the CDC's guidelines have made their pain and quality
of life worse. Almost half those surveyed said the poor management of
their pain
prompted them to consider suicide.
For more, we're joined by Terri Lewis, social scientist,
rehabilitation practitioner, clinical educator, who's running a
national survey of patients and
physicians to calculate the impacts of changes in chronic pain treatment.
Welcome to Democracy Now!, Terri. Can you explain this flipside?
People might be congratulating the CDC by saying that prescriptions
must be much lower.
But talk about what is happening for people who are not addicted but
need serious pain management.
TERRI LEWIS: Well, the bottom line is that the CDC guidelines were
written for primary care, for new cases of illness and injury, and
they were designed
to prevent addiction from developing by not creating new people who
were going to have a problem. The problem that we're seeing is that
these guidelines
have been adopted and Incorporated into federal and state regulations
in a way that they were never intended to. And we have characteristics
in our population
that we haven't accounted for in this design. We've got an aging
population. We've got an existing, multiply chronic care population
that is on the books.
These are people who are stable or have been stable in care, and they
are no longer getting the care that they need, because we have applied
and adopted
a one-size-fits-all policy, a square peg in a round hole. And we're
seeing that problem develops in creating structural barriers
throughout the whole care
system.
AMY GOODMAN: So people are losing the ability to have their drugs paid
by insurance. What role do pharmacies play in this?
TERRI LEWIS: Pharmacies are enrolled in insurer networks. Their job is
to be a party to the dispensing decision that is made for people who
live both in
urban environments and rural environments. As the DEA reduces the
available supplies, the job of the pharmacist is now to parse and
determine who is a
legitimate patient at the dispensing end versus who is not, and,
secondarily, to determine who's a reliable, legitimate prescriber and
who is not. And
that is a new role for pharmacists.
AMY GOODMAN: I want to go to former Attorney General Jeff Sessions
speaking in February of last year about the opioid crisis.
block quote
ATTORNEY GENERAL JEFF SESSIONS: We need to stop addiction. The plain
fact is, I believe, and I am operating on the assumption, that this
country prescribes
too many opioids. I mean, people need to take some aspirin sometimes
and tough it out a little. That's what General Kelly—you know, he's a
marine. He had
a surgery on his hand. It was a painful surgery. He said, "I'm not
taking any drugs." It did hurt, though. He did admit it hurt. But, I
mean, a lot of
people, you can get through these things.
block quote end
AMY GOODMAN: So, that's Jeff Sessions saying, "Just take some
aspirin." I want to bring Barry Meier back into the conversation,
author of Pain Killer:
An Empire of Deceit and the Origin of America's Opioid Epidemic. What
about this flipside, the people who desperately need chronic pain
management, and
now they're not—they're losing their insurance for these drugs?
BARRY MEIER: Well, you know, the management of pain is an extremely
complicated issue. And I agree with what Ms. Lewis said about there
being a need for
those patients to receive appropriate treatment. Appropriate
treatment, however, doesn't necessarily mean opioids. That's not—one
doesn't equal the other.
I think what doctors, what medical institutions are trying to do are
use other technologies, other means of managing pain, other than
opioids. And the
successful application of those strategies has great value for
patients in pain, because while we focus a lot on addiction, there are
other serious health
consequences to the long-term use of high doses of opioids. They have
a range of side effects that patients would be well to be without. So,
I think what
we need to see and encourage is an evolution in pain management. And I
think pain patients are a critical part of that evolution.
AMY GOODMAN: Terri Lewis, can you respond to Barry Meier?
TERRI LEWIS: Yes, I'd like to. First of all, I've been surveying this
population since 2012. The majority of people that we're concerned
about are people
with six or more chronic comorbid conditions. These are people who
have been folded up in car wrecks by freight trucks. They have
multiple progressive
diseases that are not going to get better. By denying care at this
level without a replacement system, we are denying people treatment.
We do not have
replacement treatment to deal with the kinds of problems that these
folks have. Nor do we have payment systems and physicians trained to
provide the care
that is needed, both in urban and rural America, to serve this
population. So, it's a little naive to suggest that grandma, who is
82, who is dealing with
not only Alzheimer's, but also lupus and rheumatoid arthritis, is
going to benefit from yoga and exercise. We have a very diverse,
complex problem. There
are at least four populations of pain patients in this problem. And we
need to get the data right.
AMY GOODMAN: Last comment, Barry Meier?
BARRY MEIER: Well, I think that we have experienced a huge public
health problem. Part of it has to do with the overprescribing of
opioids—the overprescribing
of opioids for patients who could benefit from other treatments. There
are certainly patients that require and deserve these drugs. But for
back pain,
dental pain, the panoply of problems for which Purdue and others
promoted this drug, that laid the seeds for what is the biggest health
crisis we are now
facing.
AMY GOODMAN: Well, I want to thank you both for being with us, Barry
Meier, author of Pain Killer: An Empire of Deceit and the Origin of
America's Opioid
Epidemic, and Terri Lewis, social scientist, rehabilitation
practitioner, who's running a national survey of patients and
physicians to calculate the impacts
of changes in chronic pain treatment.
Wednesday, March 20, 2019
and now for the rest of the story...
Once again I have been bested by my computer. It takes control from
time to time.
But undaunted, I try try try again.
Here's the AP report:
SEATTLE (AP) — The National Weather Service says Seattle's high
temperature of 79 degrees makes it the warmest March day on record
since 1894.
The National Weather Service said on Twitter that the temperature was
recorded Tuesday afternoon. The previous record was 78 degrees on
March 29, 2004.
On Monday, Seattle hit 76 degrees which was the earliest ever in the
calendar year that Seattle has been that warm.
The weather service says other cities in Western Washington including
Olympia, Bellingham and Hoquiam also broke daily record high
temperatures on Tuesday.
The reference to 1894 does not suggest that a hotter day was recorded.
1894 was the year official records began being kept in the area.
As much as I am a Sun Worshiper, our happy little home is nestled
beneath four huge, one hundred year old Cedar trees, and surrounded by
lush forests and tangles of underbrush. We count on the off-shore
flow and the soggy Spring that often sags well into late July, to keep
down the threat of forest fires. While we keep a 30 plus foot fire
lane around the house, those giant Cedars loom above our roof. Our
water tank holds 500 gallons, which would amount to spitting into a
tornado, and we have only one quarter mile road out to the county
road. As I approach my 84TH birthday, and as a totally blind man, I
would never imagine out running such a fire. Might as well get out
the mustard and mayonnaise and wait to be grilled.
In saner times a government that really cared for the well being of
its people, might have at ready a fleet of air born tankers that could
dump tons of water and chemicals on pesky fires, both in forest land
as well as in the towns and villages. But we have chosen to support
building a military machine that protects the properties and potential
properties of the Greed Driven Profiteers. And towns like Paradise be
Damned.
While some of our friends question why we would risk living in this
potential tinderbox, we remind them that ALL working class citizens
live at risk of losing all they have struggled for, if it becomes
desired by members of the Ruling Class.
An old friend of mine lost his 100 acre farm south of Seattle.
Property taxes were raised so high that he could no longer raise
enough produce to pay them, let alone make a living. His farm today
is an Industrial Park. 100 acres of rich dark farm soil now covered
with cement.
My Mother-in-Law was forced to sell her home of over 25 years, well
below market value. For over 12 years the city of Renton had not
allowed any improvements to be made to the homes in her immediate
area, while the city fought through the courts in order to make
"improvements" in the area. First they widened the highway and took
nearly all of her front yard. Then the entire house began to fall
into disrepair.
The corporation that finally bought the house mowed it down and built
a cement block storage building.
The city of Renton continued to claim they had condemned the property
in the Public interest. Yes my friends, we live in a land of equal
opportunity. Equal, that is, if you can afford to buy it.
Carl Jarvis
time to time.
But undaunted, I try try try again.
Here's the AP report:
SEATTLE (AP) — The National Weather Service says Seattle's high
temperature of 79 degrees makes it the warmest March day on record
since 1894.
The National Weather Service said on Twitter that the temperature was
recorded Tuesday afternoon. The previous record was 78 degrees on
March 29, 2004.
On Monday, Seattle hit 76 degrees which was the earliest ever in the
calendar year that Seattle has been that warm.
The weather service says other cities in Western Washington including
Olympia, Bellingham and Hoquiam also broke daily record high
temperatures on Tuesday.
The reference to 1894 does not suggest that a hotter day was recorded.
1894 was the year official records began being kept in the area.
As much as I am a Sun Worshiper, our happy little home is nestled
beneath four huge, one hundred year old Cedar trees, and surrounded by
lush forests and tangles of underbrush. We count on the off-shore
flow and the soggy Spring that often sags well into late July, to keep
down the threat of forest fires. While we keep a 30 plus foot fire
lane around the house, those giant Cedars loom above our roof. Our
water tank holds 500 gallons, which would amount to spitting into a
tornado, and we have only one quarter mile road out to the county
road. As I approach my 84TH birthday, and as a totally blind man, I
would never imagine out running such a fire. Might as well get out
the mustard and mayonnaise and wait to be grilled.
In saner times a government that really cared for the well being of
its people, might have at ready a fleet of air born tankers that could
dump tons of water and chemicals on pesky fires, both in forest land
as well as in the towns and villages. But we have chosen to support
building a military machine that protects the properties and potential
properties of the Greed Driven Profiteers. And towns like Paradise be
Damned.
While some of our friends question why we would risk living in this
potential tinderbox, we remind them that ALL working class citizens
live at risk of losing all they have struggled for, if it becomes
desired by members of the Ruling Class.
An old friend of mine lost his 100 acre farm south of Seattle.
Property taxes were raised so high that he could no longer raise
enough produce to pay them, let alone make a living. His farm today
is an Industrial Park. 100 acres of rich dark farm soil now covered
with cement.
My Mother-in-Law was forced to sell her home of over 25 years, well
below market value. For over 12 years the city of Renton had not
allowed any improvements to be made to the homes in her immediate
area, while the city fought through the courts in order to make
"improvements" in the area. First they widened the highway and took
nearly all of her front yard. Then the entire house began to fall
into disrepair.
The corporation that finally bought the house mowed it down and built
a cement block storage building.
The city of Renton continued to claim they had condemned the property
in the Public interest. Yes my friends, we live in a land of equal
opportunity. Equal, that is, if you can afford to buy it.
Carl Jarvis
Sunday, March 17, 2019
Tribute to a TrailBlazer: Nat King Cole 03/17/1919 - 03/17/2019
Nat King Cole died in 1965, still only 44 years old. That was the
same year I became totally blind. A visit back in time to those
tumultuous days give proof that here was a true Trail Blazing Pioneer
on the Front Line in the battle for Human Rights.
The following article was presented this morning(Sunday, March 17,
2019) on NPR.
Carl Jarvis
*******
Weekend Edition Sunday
TOM VITALE
Nat 'King' Cole having a smoke while disembarking from a plane in 1963.
Evening Standard/Getty Images
Born 100 years ago today,
Nat King Cole
was one of the most popular and influential entertainers of the 20th
century. As an African American ballad singer and jazz musician, he
topped the charts
year after year, sold more than 50 million records, pushed jazz piano
in a new direction and paved the way for later generations of
performers.
"Nat King Cole's voice is really one of the great gifts of nature,"
Daniel Mark Epstein, author of the 1999 biography Nat King Cole, says.
"Remember, he
was never trained as a singer. And so, his voice is absolutely pure.
He's a baritone with absolutely perfect pitch. He sings the notes true
and he hits
them right in the center."
Born Nathaniel Adams Coles in Montgomery, Ala., on March 17, 1919, the
child prodigy was later raised in Chicago. Cole's mother taught the
him to play
the piano when he was four, and at 15, he dropped out of high school
to lead his own bands. His first recordings show the influence of his
idol,
Earl Hines.
By the time he was 18, Cole was married, living in Los Angeles and
fronting a nightclub act with a name that riffed on a nursery rhyme —
the King Cole
Trio — featuring guitar, bass and piano, but not a lot of vocals.
The King Cole Trio had a huge influence, inspiring other jazz musicians like
Oscar Peterson
and
Ahmad Jamal
to form similar trios. Epstein says if Cole had never crooned a note,
he would still be an important figure in jazz.
Nat King Cole: An Incandescent Voice
50 GREAT VOICES
Nat King Cole: An Incandescent Voice
"He really is, I would say, one of our top five greatest and most
influential jazz pianists," Epstein says.
Johnny Mathis,
the 83-year-old balladeer who grew up listening to Cole as his
father's favorite singer in the 1940s, later met and became friends
with him after moving
to Beverly Hills in 1958.
"Nat King Cole was the God of popular music in our house," Mathis says
with a laugh. "That is the way that I fell in love with his music, is
through his
piano playing, then of course, I occasionally listened to him singing
— that wasn't too bad either."
The
Nat King Cole Trio
had one hit after another, and its leader became wildly popular. In
1946, the King Cole Trio landed a national radio show – the first of
its kind to be
hosted by an African-American musician. Soon, Cole began to play less
jazz and sing more ballads .
Nat King Cole plays with his jazz orchestra on the stage of The Apollo
Theater, in Harlem, N.Y. in the 1950s.
Eric Schwab/AFP/Getty Images
By the 1950s, Cole's repertoire was mostly love songs backed by
strings. He told a Swiss television reporter he was simply giving his
fans what they wanted.
"You see, it's not a case of my personal likes," Cole said in the
interview. "I try to please as many people as I possibly can and if I
find the people
like certain things, I try to give them what they like. And that's
good business too, you see."
According to Epstein, Cole saw himself as an entertainer, not an
activist. But his April 10, 1956 performance in Alabama was a crucial
moment in race relations.
"He went down to the South to perform with an interracial band, which
was pretty bold and offensive to a lot of whites," Eptein explains.
"But then he
agreed to play for segregated audiences, which offended his black audience."
Cole agreed to play a 10 p.m. show at the Birmingham Municipal
Auditorium for black audiences, and an early show for white audiences,
which attracted a
group of local white supremacists.
"The White Citizens Council of Alabama had this plot to kidnap Cole
from the theater, Eptein says. "The plot failed, but the hoodlums did
storm the stage,
break up the performance. They knocked Nat Cole off the piano bench
and injured his back."
'The Nat King Cole Show': From The Small Screen To Your Computer Screen, Finally
THE RECORD
'The Nat King Cole Show': From The Small Screen To Your Computer Screen, Finally
A doctor treated Cole in his dressing room, and the singer returned to
the stage for the late show. The incident made national news, and
seven months later,
Cole became the first major African-American musician to host a
national television variety show.
The Nat King Cole Show had a large audience, but no national sponsor
would back a show with a black host for fear of alienating Southern
viewers. NBC was
losing money, and Cole canceled the weekly program after a little more
than a year. However, Epstein says Cole continued to reach a wide
audience through
records that topped the charts. "That was the great gift of his
charisma," Epstein says. "That there was so much passion in his voice
and so much intelligence,
he was able to transcend the color barrier."
Cole didn't live long enough to see his career overshadowed by rock
and roll. A heavy smoker all his life, he was diagnosed with lung
cancer in 1964 and
went into the studio for the last time in June of that year. Only 45
years old, Cole died on Feb. 15, 1965.
"He was the nicest man you'd ever want to meet in your life," Mathis
recalls of his friend. "Just a very down-to-earth person who happened
to be one of
the greatest musicians of all time. And he became, of course, a model
for so many people, especially someone like myself."
same year I became totally blind. A visit back in time to those
tumultuous days give proof that here was a true Trail Blazing Pioneer
on the Front Line in the battle for Human Rights.
The following article was presented this morning(Sunday, March 17,
2019) on NPR.
Carl Jarvis
*******
Weekend Edition Sunday
TOM VITALE
Nat 'King' Cole having a smoke while disembarking from a plane in 1963.
Evening Standard/Getty Images
Born 100 years ago today,
Nat King Cole
was one of the most popular and influential entertainers of the 20th
century. As an African American ballad singer and jazz musician, he
topped the charts
year after year, sold more than 50 million records, pushed jazz piano
in a new direction and paved the way for later generations of
performers.
"Nat King Cole's voice is really one of the great gifts of nature,"
Daniel Mark Epstein, author of the 1999 biography Nat King Cole, says.
"Remember, he
was never trained as a singer. And so, his voice is absolutely pure.
He's a baritone with absolutely perfect pitch. He sings the notes true
and he hits
them right in the center."
Born Nathaniel Adams Coles in Montgomery, Ala., on March 17, 1919, the
child prodigy was later raised in Chicago. Cole's mother taught the
him to play
the piano when he was four, and at 15, he dropped out of high school
to lead his own bands. His first recordings show the influence of his
idol,
Earl Hines.
By the time he was 18, Cole was married, living in Los Angeles and
fronting a nightclub act with a name that riffed on a nursery rhyme —
the King Cole
Trio — featuring guitar, bass and piano, but not a lot of vocals.
The King Cole Trio had a huge influence, inspiring other jazz musicians like
Oscar Peterson
and
Ahmad Jamal
to form similar trios. Epstein says if Cole had never crooned a note,
he would still be an important figure in jazz.
Nat King Cole: An Incandescent Voice
50 GREAT VOICES
Nat King Cole: An Incandescent Voice
"He really is, I would say, one of our top five greatest and most
influential jazz pianists," Epstein says.
Johnny Mathis,
the 83-year-old balladeer who grew up listening to Cole as his
father's favorite singer in the 1940s, later met and became friends
with him after moving
to Beverly Hills in 1958.
"Nat King Cole was the God of popular music in our house," Mathis says
with a laugh. "That is the way that I fell in love with his music, is
through his
piano playing, then of course, I occasionally listened to him singing
— that wasn't too bad either."
The
Nat King Cole Trio
had one hit after another, and its leader became wildly popular. In
1946, the King Cole Trio landed a national radio show – the first of
its kind to be
hosted by an African-American musician. Soon, Cole began to play less
jazz and sing more ballads .
Nat King Cole plays with his jazz orchestra on the stage of The Apollo
Theater, in Harlem, N.Y. in the 1950s.
Eric Schwab/AFP/Getty Images
By the 1950s, Cole's repertoire was mostly love songs backed by
strings. He told a Swiss television reporter he was simply giving his
fans what they wanted.
"You see, it's not a case of my personal likes," Cole said in the
interview. "I try to please as many people as I possibly can and if I
find the people
like certain things, I try to give them what they like. And that's
good business too, you see."
According to Epstein, Cole saw himself as an entertainer, not an
activist. But his April 10, 1956 performance in Alabama was a crucial
moment in race relations.
"He went down to the South to perform with an interracial band, which
was pretty bold and offensive to a lot of whites," Eptein explains.
"But then he
agreed to play for segregated audiences, which offended his black audience."
Cole agreed to play a 10 p.m. show at the Birmingham Municipal
Auditorium for black audiences, and an early show for white audiences,
which attracted a
group of local white supremacists.
"The White Citizens Council of Alabama had this plot to kidnap Cole
from the theater, Eptein says. "The plot failed, but the hoodlums did
storm the stage,
break up the performance. They knocked Nat Cole off the piano bench
and injured his back."
'The Nat King Cole Show': From The Small Screen To Your Computer Screen, Finally
THE RECORD
'The Nat King Cole Show': From The Small Screen To Your Computer Screen, Finally
A doctor treated Cole in his dressing room, and the singer returned to
the stage for the late show. The incident made national news, and
seven months later,
Cole became the first major African-American musician to host a
national television variety show.
The Nat King Cole Show had a large audience, but no national sponsor
would back a show with a black host for fear of alienating Southern
viewers. NBC was
losing money, and Cole canceled the weekly program after a little more
than a year. However, Epstein says Cole continued to reach a wide
audience through
records that topped the charts. "That was the great gift of his
charisma," Epstein says. "That there was so much passion in his voice
and so much intelligence,
he was able to transcend the color barrier."
Cole didn't live long enough to see his career overshadowed by rock
and roll. A heavy smoker all his life, he was diagnosed with lung
cancer in 1964 and
went into the studio for the last time in June of that year. Only 45
years old, Cole died on Feb. 15, 1965.
"He was the nicest man you'd ever want to meet in your life," Mathis
recalls of his friend. "Just a very down-to-earth person who happened
to be one of
the greatest musicians of all time. And he became, of course, a model
for so many people, especially someone like myself."
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)