• About
  • Documentary Films
  • Index
  • Nota bene
  • Protect and Serve
  • Readings

Lumpenproletariat

~ free speech

Lumpenproletariat

Category Archives: Democratic Party (USA)

Commission On Presidential Debates Will Ban Alternative Political Parties In Upcoming 2016 U.S. Presidential Debates

19 Mon Sep 2016

Posted by ztnh in Anti-Imperialism, Democracy Deferred, Democratic Party (USA), Political Science, Presidential Election 2016

≈ Leave a comment

Tags

Amy Goodman, Bernie Sanders, Democracy Now!, Dr. Jill Stein, Hillary Rodham Clinton, KPFA, Pacifica Radio Network, Ralph Nader (b. 1934), transcript, Two-Party Dictatorship

"ProjectCensored" by Project Censored - This image has been downloaded from the website of Project Censored at www.projectcensored.org.. Licensed under Fair use via Wikipedia - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:ProjectCensored.png#/media/File:ProjectCensored.pngLUMPENPROLETARIAT—It is now official, although we already knew with great certainty that this would happen.  The two-party dictatorship will not debate their political opponents.  That is to say, the Democratic and Republican parties, who collude to monopolise the democratic process, will not allow any of their opponents to debate them during the nationally broadcast presidential debates.  What do you think about that?  What shall we do about that?

Instead of a sincere and adult national political discourse in which the full range of the nation’s political consciousness is addressed, the two-party dictatorship will engage in political pantomime engineered to persuade us that they sincerely represent different interests than the same set of corporate, military industrial complex, and Wall Street interests, which funded both of their corporate political parties.  Attorney, consumer advocate, former U.S. presidential candidate, and freedom fighter Ralph Nader has been interviewed by Democracy Now! to discuss this question of political censorship in the United States presidential debates. [1]  Listen/view (and/or download) here. [2]

Messina

***

[Working draft transcript of actual radio broadcast by Messina for Lumpenproletariat and KPFA Radio.]

DEMOCRACY NOW!—[19 SEP 2016]

[SNIP]

[(c. 47:00)  As KPFA is currently in the midst of a fund drive, set against the backdrop of a very real budgetary crisis at KPFA, Christina Anisted(sp?) is appealing for listener funding of free speech radio, so that they won’t have to go off the air, or start taking corporate money and selling out.]

[(c. 9:51)  Nader:  “If you’ll let me” articulate it…  Nader had to appeal to Goodman to give him a chance and get deeper into these issues.  Nader was plugging his websites for more information, but Goodman just cut into that to change the subject to ask about the Libertarian Party.  That was a pedestrian question because most progressives already understand that the Libertarian Party is not progressive in its political positions.  But when all was said and done, Amy Goodman ran defence for Hillary Clinton and never gave Ralph Nader an opportunity to disabuse progressives and liberals of their illusions about Hillary Clinton as being anything other than a Wall Street candidate, an anti-working class candidate, an imperialist candidate.  Probably, the most important thing Democracy Now! could have done would have been to focus Ralph Nader’s expertise on the candidates about which free speech media audiences may be undecided.  It’s easily understood that free speech audiences, who are by and large, anti-imperialist, anti-capitalist, and pro-peace, pro-human rights, are not electorally supporting Trump.  But they may be wondering whether to support Hillary Clinton and the Democratic Party or to support someone like Dr. Jill Stein and the Green Party.  Democracy Now! would have better served its audience had it focused Ralph Nader’s expertise on the pros and cons of voting for Hillary Clinton and of supporting the Democratic Party.  It seems to be an act of cowardice for KPFA, as a part of its local, regional, and national role within its concentric spheres of influence, to not endorse any candidates or political parties during elections.  If there existed no such consensus within KPFA, which many of us know there does not, then each political faction within KPFA could endorse their electoral picks for the benefit of their audiences, and in the spirit of transparency, or at the very least circulate a poll internally to get a sense of who KPFA staffers and volunteers are planning on supporting electorally.  That would be in keeping with the Mission Statement of KPFA/Pacifica Radio Network.  Local SF Bay Area press would usually publish pros and cons of voting for this or that candidate, or who their picks were in a given election.  And, historically, newspapers and the press used to be transparent about their political preferences, or whom they understood best represented the interests of their audiences.  But, nowadays, there’s this stifling notion of objectivity of the press, which is often misunderstood, and is often allowed to suppress dissent and/or free speech.  Often, press either leans politically left or right, but they feign neutrality.  It’s very telling that Amy Goodman, almost rudely, made Nader “be specific” about his critiques of Donald Trump, which we already know and understand on the left.  But Amy Goodman did not give Ralph Nader an opportunity to expose the crimes of Hillary Clinton when Ralph Nader said he was not going to vote for Hillary.  Goodman did not ask Nader to “be specific” about his rejection of Hillary Clinton.  Amazingly, somehow, Amy Goodman was not even slightly curious about why Ralph Nader would reject Hillary Clinton for the U.S. Presidency.  Are we to believe Goodman wasn’t even slightly curious about the gender question, or the first-woman-president question?  No, no, my friends.  There is clearly a political agenda subtext here, which deprives the people of a more honest discussion via listener/viewer-sponsored free speech media.  From the point of view of many of us, who have listened to Amy Goodman’s reporting over the years, we suspect that she doesn’t want to fully expose the problems with the Democratic Party and their operatives.  This is due to the reform-the-Democratic-Party-from-within ideology.]

[SNIP] (c. 59:59)

Learn more at DEMOCRACY NOW!.

[This transcript will be expanded as time constraints, and/or demand or resources, allow.]

***

[The following transcript and text is from DemocracyNow.org.]

DEMOCRACY NOW!—[19 SEP 2016]  It’s official: When the first presidential debate takes place next Monday, a week from today, it will exclude third-party candidates from the debate stage. The Commission on Presidential Debates announced Friday that both Dr. Jill Stein of the Green Party and Gary Johnson of the Libertarian Party failed to qualify by polling at 15 percent or higher. This comes as polls show Donald Trump and Hillary Clinton are among the least popular major-party candidates to ever run for the White House. We get reaction from four-time presidential candidate Ralph Nader, who has previously been excluded from debates. He has a new book titled “Breaking Through Power: It’s Easier Than We Think.”


TRANSCRIPT

This is a rush transcript [accessed 10:46 PDT  19 SEP 2016]. Copy may not be in its final form.

AMY GOODMAN: Well, it’s official. When the first presidential debate takes place next Monday, a week from today, it will exclude third-party candidates. The Commission on Presidential Debates announced Friday that both Dr. Jill Stein of the Green Party and Libertarian Gary Johnson, the former governor of New Mexico, failed to qualify by polling at 15 percent or higher. Johnson is currently polling at 8 percent, has reached as high as 12 percent at some points. Dr. Stein is reportedly averaging about 3 percent and has peaked at 6 percent in some national polls. A recent poll by Morning Consult found more than half of registered voters believe Johnson should partake in the debate scheduled for September 26, and nearly half believe Stein should, as well. This comes as polls show Trump and Clinton are among the least popular major-party candidates to ever run for the White House. McClatchy recently polled voters under the age of 30 and found 41 percent backed Clinton, 23 percent supported Johnson, 16 percent backed Stein, and only 9 percent backed Trump.

In 2012, Stein and her running mate, Cheri Honkala, were arrested as they attempted to enter the presidential debate site at Hofstra University, the same location where Monday’s debate will take place. Democracy Now! was there at the time of their arrest, when the third-party candidates were blocked by a solid wall of police before sitting down on the ground. They were then arrested.

DR. JILL STEIN: Well, we’re here to stand our ground. We’re here to stand ground for the American people, who have been systematically locked out of these debates for decades by the Commission on Presidential Debates. We think that this commission is entirely illegitimate; that if—if democracy truly prevailed, there would be no such commission, that the debates would still be run by the League of Women Voters, that the debates would be open.

POLICE OFFICER 1: Ladies and gentlemen, you are obstructing the vehicle of pedestrians and traffic. If you refuse to move, you are subject to arrest.

Remove them. Bring them back to arrest them, please.

POLICE OFFICER 2: Come on, ma’am.

POLICE OFFICER 3: Would you step up, please? Stand up, please?

POLICE OFFICER 2: We’ll help you. Come on. Thank you, ma’am.

POLICE OFFICER 3: Thank you, ladies.

POLICE OFFICER 2: Watch the flag.

POLICE OFFICER 1: Thank you, ladies.

AMY GOODMAN: That’s the Green Party’s presidential candidate in 2012, Jill Stein, seeking entrance to the presidential debate at the time at Hofstra. This year she’s continued to demand four-way presidential debates and said in a statement she plans to show up with hundreds of supporters outside that first debate. The debates are organized by the Commission on Presidential Debates, which is controlled by the Democratic and Republican parties. It’s said it will review the criteria for the second and third debates in the future.

In a minute, we’ll be joined by former third-party presidential candidate Ralph Nader. But first, this is George Farah, the founder and executive director of Open Debates, speaking on Democracy Now! about how the Democrats and Republicans took control of the debate process.

GEORGE FARAH: GEORGE FARAH: The League of Women Voters ran the presidential debate process from 1976 until 1984, and they were a very courageous and genuinely independent, nonpartisan sponsor. And whenever the candidates attempted to manipulate the presidential debates behind closed doors, either to exclude a viable independent candidate or to sanitize the formats, the league had the courage to challenge the Republican and Democratic nominees and, if necessary, go public.

In 1980, independent candidate John B. Anderson was polling about 12 percent in the polls. The league insisted that Anderson be allowed to participate, because the vast majority of the American people wanted to see him, but Jimmy Carter, President Jimmy Carter, refused to debate him. The league went forward anyway and held a presidential debate with an empty chair, showing that Jimmy Carter wasn’t going to show up.

Four years later, when the Republican and Democratic nominees tried to get rid of difficult questions by vetoing 80 of the moderators that they had proposed to host the debates, the league said, “This is unacceptable.” They held a press conference and attacked the campaigns for trying to get rid of difficult questions.

And lastly, in 1988, was the first attempt by the Republican and Democratic campaigns to negotiate a detailed contract. It was tame by comparison, a mere 12 pages. It talked about who could be in the audience and how the format would be structured, but the league found that kind of lack of transparency and that kind of candidate control to be fundamentally outrageous and antithetical to our democratic process. They released the contract and stated they refuse to be an accessory to the hoodwinking of the American people and refuse to implement it.

And today, what do we have? We have a private corporation that was created by the Republican and Democratic parties called the Commission on Presidential Debates. It seized control of the presidential debates precisely because the league was independent, precisely because this women’s organization had the guts to stand up to the candidates that the major-party candidates had nominated.

AMY GOODMAN: That’s George Farah, the founder and executive director of Open Debates.

For more on the Commission on Presidential Debates, who is excluded from the first presidential debate of 2016, we’re joined by someone who’s been through this before: yes, four-time presidential candidate Ralph Nader, longtime consumer advocate and corporate critic, has a new book out, Breaking Through Power: It’s Easier Than We Think. He is speaking today here in New York.

Ralph, talk about this decision that just came down—no third-party candidates in the first debate. You know this well.

RALPH NADER: Well, corporations are deciding who debates, when they debate, who asks the questions. So, in the primaries, you had major corporations decide who gets on, who doesn’t. They excluded, for example, the former head of the IRS, Mr. Everson, former deputy of immigration service, the only man who had any experience in the federal government, because he didn’t have a super PAC sponsoring him. And you can see what they did with Dennis Kucinich in 2012.

Now we have the Super Bowl of debates, and we have another corporation, which is funded by other corporations, like Anheuser-Busch, Ford Motor Company, AT&T. They have these hospitality suites at the debate location. And this is controlled by the two-party tyranny that doesn’t want any competition, doesn’t want voices that represent majoritarian directions in this country, like living wage, full Medicare for all, crackdown on corporate crime, pulling back on empire, civil liberties advance instead of the PATRIOT Act. All of these are represented by our third parties, which cannot reach tens of millions of people. You see, it’s basically a terminal exclusion, because you can go and speak to the biggest crowds of all—I filled Madison Square Garden, the Boston Garden, the Target Center; I reached less than 2 percent of the people I could have reached had I been on one debate. And the polls, again and again, showed that a majority of the people want more people on that stage. They don’t just want the Republican and Democratic Party going through basically parallel news conferences. They’re not really debates.

A Debate on Empire: Is Donald Trump One Terrorist Attack Away from the Presidency?

Learn more at DEMOCRACY NOW!.

***

[1]  Historically, if we analyse Democracy Now!‘s coverage of presidential debates, they’ve given an edge to the Democratic Party and marginalised alternative political parties, such as the Green Party, the Peace and Freedom Party, and the Libertarian Party.  It has been very subtly done.  Many, even some on the left, have not noticed.  But, for those of us who have noticed, it has been so maddening, that it’s almost an insult for Democracy Now! to now bring Ralph Nader on the air.

The same thing goes for free speech radio KPFA (Berkeley, CA), one of the nation’s strongest free speech/community radio stations, which is carried by affiliates across the nation.  KPFA has historically marginalised Ralph Nader, alternative political parties, socialist political parties, alternative conservative parties, and so forth.  This has been most devastatingly done during U.S. Presidency Election cycles.  But, then, at KPFA, we know that the most cohesive faction at KPFA, currently known as SaveKPFA, has historically been associated with the Wellstone Democratic Renewal Club, meaning they are essentially Democrats.  So, of course, they’re going to give a subtle edge in their coverage to the Democratic Party.

This goes back to the historical legacy of the politics of the left in the United States.  After the McCarthy Era red scares and witch hunts, left scattered.  Socialists and communists were criminalised and demonised.  So, many of them went into the Democratic Party.  The ideology is to transform the Democratic Party from within into a progressive people’s party.  But another segment of that post-McCarthy Era scattered left, when it became a crime in the United States to read Marx, to be considered a socialist or a communist, or to question capitalist modes of production, concluded that working within the Democratic Party would never work because of

During this interview, Amy Goodman almost seems out to get Ralph Nader, or to discredit him by calling him out to back up his critiques of Donald Trump.  But Ralph Nader does so brilliantly.  Nader would have done so in the first place had he been given the opportunity to do so.  Once she called him on it, then she gave him enough air time to substantiate his claims.

Ralph Nader refused to tell Amy Goodman who he is going to vote for.  That’s an interesting question coming form Amy Goodman.  I wish Amy Goodman would have volunteered, or Nader would’ve asked her, who she is planning to vote for.  As someone who has regularly listened to Amy Goodman’s broadcasts on KPFA since the late 1990s, met her in person, attended her lectures, read her articles, and so forth, I can say with almost 99% certainty that she would have to admit that she’s planning to vote for Hillary Clinton, despite all of her coverage of Hillary’s political crimes, corruption, opportunism, and lawlessness.  At least, Ralph Nader was courageous enough to admit that he’s not voting for Hillary or Trump.

***

[19 SEP 2016]

[Last modified  16:09 PDT  19 SEP 2016]

Save

Save

Save

Save

Save

Save

Save

Save

Save

Save

Save

Advertisements

Share this:

  • Tweet

Like this:

Like Loading...

Clinton Cash: The Untold Story of How and Why Foreign Governments and Businesses Helped Make Bill and Hillary Rich (2015) by Peter Schweizer

01 Mon Aug 2016

Posted by ztnh in Democracy Deferred, Democratic Party (USA), Documentary Film, Political Science, Presidential Election 2016

≈ Leave a comment

Tags

Clinton Cash: The Untold Story of How and Why Foreign Governments and Businesses Helped Make Bill and Hillary Rich, Dr. Hillary Diane Rodham Clinton (b. 1947), Peter Schweizer

Clinton Cash (2015) by Peter SchweizerLUMPENPROLETARIAT—If you’ve been paying somewhat close attention to news headlines in recent years, then you would have been informed of various examples of the exorbitant speaking fees Hillary Clinton has commanded (not to mention Bill‘s).  This makes us wonder whether Hillary Clinton was being paid for her pearls of wisdom, or for political favors or political graft.  Given the obvious conflicts of interest with public officials taking bribes, we welcome those out there connecting the dots for those of us unable (or unwilling) to follow the news headlines very closely.

For example, Clinton Cash, is a new documentary film based on the 2015 book of the same name by author and right-wing political consultant Peter Schweizer.  Clinton Cash is helping American voters (and others) understand why Hillary Rodham Clinton does not deserve anybody’s vote.  (Of course right-wingers are going to come after Hillary hard this election year, but, for the record, Trump doesn’t deserve anybody’s vote either, as must be evident to anyone examining the question from a working class perspective.)  Clinton Cash is a timely documentary film (and book) in one of the most exciting, and corrupted, election seasons in recent memory.

Messina

Clinton Cash (2016) [1]

“Clinton Cash, is a feature documentary based on the Peter Schweizer book that the New York Times hailed as ‘The most anticipated and feared book of a presidential cycle.’

“Clinton Cash investigates how Bill and Hillary Clinton went from being ‘dead broke’ after leaving the White House to amassing a net worth of over $150 million, with over $2 billion in donations to their foundation.  This wealth was accumulated during Mrs. Clinton’s tenure as US Secretary of State through lucrative speaking fees and contracts paid for by foreign companies and Clinton Foundation donors.”

***

[Messina’s Notes On Clinton Cash]

  • (c. 0:01)  Introduction
    • The Clintons’ ostensibly philanthropic Clinton Foundation
      • Only 10% of Clinton Foundation funds actually go to charities
  • (c. 4:35)  The Clintons and the African Continent
    • Oligarchs have taken power, or have been installed as proxies or puppet governments, in various nations on the African continent.  And those oligarchs make deals with foreign businesses and governments to support them in exchange for access to mineral deposits and mining rights.
    • (c. 5:43)  Hillary Clinton contradicts her pro-environmental claims by promoting fracking all around the world
    • (c. 6:00)  Paul Kagame dictatorship is propped up by the Clintons

***

THE FREE THOUGHT PROJECT—[1 AUG 2016]  A book hailed by the New York Times as “The most anticipated and feared book of a presidential cycle” has been turned into a full-length documentary, with even MSNBC describing the newly released documentary as “devastating” for the Hillary Clinton presidential campaign.

The feature documentary — Clinton Cash — is adapted from Peter Schweizer’s New York Times best-selling book Clinton Cash: The Untold Story of How and Why Foreign Governments and Businesses Helped Make Bill and Hillary Rich, and has now been posted to YouTube for all to see exactly how the pay-for-play of the Clinton machine works.

Clinton Cash delves into how Bill and Hillary Clinton went from being self-admittedly “dead broke” after leaving the White House to building a personal fortune worth of over $150 million — with over $2 billion in donations coming into their foundation.

Not coincidentally, this newfound wealth was accumulated while Mrs. Clinton was operating as the U.S. Secretary of State. It was primarily gained through lucrative speaking fees and contracts paid for by foreign companies and Clinton Foundation donors – as well as numerous foreign governments with a vested interest in activities the State Department regulates and oversees.

Unsurprisingly, the Clinton campaign has downplayed the revelations exposed in the documentary as “conspiracy theory.” However, these claims seem to hold little weight, as many of the biggest bombshells described in the documentary were investigated and confirmed by left-leaning mainstream media outlets.

Here are at least 11 facts that mainstream media say are true, verified, and accurate from this viral documentary.

Learn more at THE FREE THOUGHT PROJECT.

***

Related Lumpenproletariat articles, relevant to Hillary Clinton’s 2015-2016 presidential campaign, include:

  • “Why Hillary Doesn’t Deserve the Black Vote“, by Dr. Michelle Alexander, 27 JUL 2016
  • “Hillary Clinton, US/NATO, & the Lynching of Gaddafi“, 3 MAR 2016
  • “Activist Berta Caseres Assassinated,” 3 MAR 2016
  • “Historical Archive: Third Party Challenge to Unconstitutional Prop 14“, 2 MAR 2016
  • “My Turn: Hillary Clinton Targets the Presidency (2015) by Doug Henwood,” 29 FEB 2016
  • “Hillary Clinton for USA Presidency: Pros and Cons“, 13 APR 2015

***

[1]  YouTube video by Philly Blunt.  Also see the Free Thought Project, among other sources.  (Thanks to brother RDM for bringing this important documentary film to our attention.)

***

[1 AUG 2016]

[Last modified  16:53 PDT  4 AUG 2016]

Save

Save

Save

Save

Save

Save

Save

Save

Save

Save

Save

Save

Save

Share this:

  • Tweet

Like this:

Like Loading...

Democratic National Convention 2016, Day One

25 Mon Jul 2016

Posted by ztnh in Democracy Deferred, Democratic Party (USA), Political Science, Presidential Election 2016

≈ Leave a comment

Tags

Askia Muhammed, Bernie Sanders, Chris Hedges, Debbie Wasserman Schultz, Democratic National Convention 2016, DNC 2016, Dr. Cornel West, Dr. Stephanie Kelton, Dr. William K. Black, Elizabeth Warren, Hillary Rodham Clinton, KPFA, Margaret Prescod, Michelle Obama, MMT, Pacifica Radio Network, President Barack Obama, Tim Kaine, Trans-Pacific Partnership

Democratic_National_Convention_2016_LogoLUMPENPROLETARIAT—The Democratic Party has convened once again to confirm the nomination of their candidate for the presidency of the United States. The 2016 Democratic National Convention (DNC) has begun today in Philadelphia, Pennsylvania.  And it’s pretty much locked in for Hillary Clinton, an imperialist politician who has presided over the overthrow of democratically elected governments as Secretary of State under Obama, promoted fracking all around the world undermining the hopes of environmental activists, and who has apparently worked behind the scenes to steal the Democratic Primary nomination.

The fight for Bernie Sander‘s political revolution seems to have been over before it began.  Although Bernie Sanders has been polling as the more popular candidate, the corporate media machine seems to have decided previously that Bernie Sanders must be sidelined.  And then there was the apparent Democratic Primary rule changes, which favored Clinton, such as in Nevada.  And, then, there was the corruption of the Democratic National Committee, spearheaded by Debbie Wasserman Schultz.  Thanks to WikiLeaks, leaked Democratic National Committee emails proved suspicions that the Democratic National Committee was not honoring its own rules and remaining neutral, but instead was actively working to undermine Bernie Sanders‘ campaign.  As Greg Palast and others have been arguing, the democratic process has been rigged against alternative candidates, such as Bernie Sanders (not to mention alternative political parties and their candidates, such as the Green Party‘s Dr. Jill Stein).

But, perhaps, Bernie Sanders‘ biggest impediment to political success has been his own cowardice, apparently conceding to Hillary Clinton even before Day One of the DNC.  When Sanders met with Obama recently, prior to the DNC, a line in the sand must have been drawn, which Sanders evidently was unwilling to cross, even given his advanced age.  Time, it seems, does not always make one bolder.

Bernie Sanders seems to have already betrayed all of his supporters, including his chief economists from the radical heterodox economics department at the University of Missouri-Kansas City.  Sanders could have informed the American people, for example, how heterodox economic concepts, such as MMT for example, can create a job guarantee programme (aka employer of last resort) capable of effectively ending involuntary unemployment as we know it.  This would help stimulate our economy, reduce poverty, reduce crime and social dysfunction, and easily help Sanders defeat Hillary in the Democratic Primary contest for the presidential nomination.  But Sanders held back.  Sanders gave in.

Free speech radio has provided critical coverage of the 2016 Republican National Convention, and will also report from this year’s Green Party National Convention.  Today, free speech radio has faithfully covered Day One of the 2016 Democratic National Convention.  Listen (and/or download) here. [1]

Messina

***

PACIFICA RADIO—[25 JUL 2016]  Bernie Sanders addresses the Democratic National Convention on its opening night.  So does progressive favorite Massachusetts Senator Elizabeth Warren and Michelle Obama.  Sanders supporters marched in the hot sun ahead of the convention’s opening, chanting protests against the Democratic National Committee and its outgoing chair, Florida Congresswoman Debbie Wasserman Schultz.  The Sanders supporters are angry over the evidence revealed in leaked emails that DNC officials discussed among themselves how to defeat Bernie Sanders during the Democratic primaries.  Sanders supporters are also unhappy about Hillary Clinton’s choice of Virginia Senator Tim Kaine as her running mate, calling it an assault on the progressive base of the Democratic Party.  They say Kaine has been wrong on issues ranging from advocating the use of coal, to the Trans Pacific Partnership trade deal, right to work laws and tax rates for the wealthy.

Learn more at PACIFICA RADIO.

***

[Working draft transcript of actual radio broadcast by Messina for Lumpenproletariat and Pacifica Radio Network.]

PACIFICA RADIO—[25 JUL 2016]  [Up next is the] Democratic National Convention.  [dead air; technical difficulties]  (c. 1:25)

ASKIA MUHAMMED:  “[inaudible]  It’s gonna be a wild session here, the first opening session of the Democratic National Convention.”

MARGARET PRESCOD:  “Well, I think Mother Nature must be cooperating, in a way, with the protestors.  It seems as though there have been a flash flood of protestors—”

ASKIA MUHAMMED:  “Absolutely.”

MARGARET PRESCOD:  “—the last few days, including this very evening where the trains were shut down.”

ASKIA MUHAMMED:  “Absolutely.”

MARGARET PRESCOD:  “Some of the bus stations were shut down.”

ASKIA MUHAMMED:  “Right.  And people have—as a matter of fact, Cornel West and Chris Hedges spoke to one of the events.  Linda Perry Barr reports:  At one point, about 50 demonstrators sat down refusing to move until a Mississippi state flag with the Confederate symbol was removed.  An hour later it was removed.

“This is the kind of action and the power, that’s goin’ on in the streets as well as in the suites here among the deliberating [dead air; technical difficulties]

MARGARET PRESCOD:  “[dead air; technical difficulties]  Askia Muhammed, also a rocky start to say the very least.

“What we’re gonna do now:  We’re gonna give you just a little taste of it.  We’re gonna go now to a clip from The Washington Post about some of the goings on on the floor and around this kick-off of the DNC. [2]

[Audio from Washington Post video clip]  (c. 3:00)

UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE SPEAKER:  “It all started on Friday.  The emails dropped.  And they were incredibly embarrassing, apparently confirming that Democratic officials had, basically, been trying to help Hillary Clinton throughout the Primary.  By Saturday, Democrats were getting really, really nervous.  The emails were bad.  They made the Party look bad.  And, by Sunday morning, it was clear that she [Debbie Wasserman Schultz] was being pressured to resign, both, from within the campaign and from outside of the campaign, not just from Bernie Sanders supporters.  It ended when the President, himself, called her and asked her to resign.  And that, Democrats told me, is not a very good sign.  You don’t want the President to be the one to fire you, essentially.

“So, here we at the Convention.  She is not resigning at the beginning of the Convention, but at the end.  And, so, she will be a constant presence in Philadelphia [dead air; technical difficulties] installed in her position.  And it’s still going to be a source of tension and friction with the Clinton folks.  They’ve worked for weeks and weeks with Bernie Sanders supporters to try to hammer out some of the dee— [dead air; technical difficulties]

“At the same time, I think a lot of Democrats, and including Clinton Camp officials, that I spoke to, really think that by resolving Debbie Wasserman Schultz before the Convention gavelled in on Monday they have, kind of, put that chapter behind them; and they have the best opportunity to move forward.  The speakers lists are, kind of, designed to showcase the best of the Party, its rising stars, its biggest names, the most popular figures.  And they are hoping that those people, who are more unifying figures will, kind of, undo some of the damage, that they sustained over the last several days.  (c. 4:50)

“The Clinton Camp is talking about the leak as a ploy by the Russians to help Donald Trump.  And part of that is to deflect.  They wanna make this about Trump and not about them.  But part of it is also that they feel like the timing is strategic; it’s intended to hurt them right before the Convention.  They’re trying to do everything they can to not focus on the details of the leak and to deal with individual problems associated with the things, that were said individually, but move on to what they think is the big picture issue, which is that they are fighting a campaign against a Republican opponent, Donald Trump.  And they believe that they need their entire Democratic establishment to get behind them on this.”  (c. 5:38)

MARGARET PRESCOD:  “Okay, so, you heard that report, Askia.  I mean it’s like:  Blame Putin.  (Right?)  Blame the Russians. [chuckles]  

“And if you think that was good, we’ve got another juicy clip coming, that happened on the floor.  But, Askia, what do you think?”  (c. 5:51)

[Pacifica Radio hosts continue discussing the Debbie Wasserman Schultz scandal, involving rigging the Democratic Primary against Bernie Sanders and in favor of Hillary Clinton.]

[(c. 7:40)  Controversy on the Democratic National Convention floor]

[(c. 9:29)  A brief interview with Dr. William K. Black, professor of Law and Economics, University of Missouri-Kansas City.  Sadly, this interview did not acknowledge the fact that Professor Black, alongside Dr. Stephanie Kelton (both former UMKC professors of your author), were working as the chief economists for Bernie Sanders, even up through Bernie’s Democratic Primary campaign.  Even more tragic is the fact that this interview did not acknowledge the progressive economic policies promoted by heterodox economists, such as Dr. Kelton and Dr. Black at the UMKC Department of Economics.  The positive side of this interview is that Professor Black was able to discuss his recent article for Consortium News, which exposes Hillary Clinton’s Vice Presidential running mate, Tim Kaine, has been calling for further economic deregulation of the sort, which President Bill Clinton engaged in with his Reinventing Government initiatives, which laid the groundwork in the 1990s for the Global Financial Crisis of the late 2000s.]

[(c.. 18:00)  Bernie Sanders speech is booed by his own supporters when Sanders urges the Sanders Campaign to vote for Hillary Clinton.]

[(c. 23:35)  The Green Party’s Dr. Jill Stein]

[SNIP]

[SNIP]  (c. 3:59:59)

Learn more at PACIFICA RADIO.

[This transcript will be expanded as time constraints, and/or demand or resources, allow.]

***

[1]  Terrestrial radio transmission, 94.1 FM (KPFA, Berkeley, CA) (also broadcast simultaneously across the national Pacifica Radio Network) with online simulcast and digital archiving:  Special Programming: Democratic National Convention, Day One, this broadcast hosted by Askia Muhammed and Margaret Prescod, Monday, 25 JUL 2016, 17:00 PDT, four-hour broadcast.

[2]  Also see:

  • “Leaked DNC emails show top Democrats writing off Sanders during the primaries”, Washington Post, 24 JUL 2016.

***

[Though the image entitled “Democratic National Convention 2016 Logo” is subject to copyright, its use is covered by U.S. fair use laws, and the stricter requirements of Wikipedia’s non-free content policies, because:  It illustrates an educational article about the entity that the logo represents.
# The DNC logo image is used as the primary means of visual identification of the article topic.
# The DNC logo is a low resolution image, and thus not suitable for production of counterfeit goods, as it has been rendered at a small size and with lower detail since it is a scalable vector image.
# The DNC logo is not used in such a way that a reader would be confused into believing that the article is written or authorized by the owner of the logo.
# The DNC logo is not replaceable with an uncopyrighted or freely copyrighted image of comparable educational value.]

[8 AUG 2016]

[Last modified  14:41 PDT  8 AUG 2016]

Save

Save

Save

Save

Save

Save

Save

Save

Save

Save

Share this:

  • Tweet

Like this:

Like Loading...
← Older posts
Newer posts →
Advertisements

Subscribe

  • Entries (RSS)
  • Comments (RSS)

Archives

  • Oct 2017
  • Jul 2017
  • May 2017
  • Apr 2017
  • Mar 2017
  • Feb 2017
  • Jan 2017
  • Dec 2016
  • Nov 2016
  • Oct 2016
  • Sep 2016
  • Aug 2016
  • Jul 2016
  • Jun 2016
  • May 2016
  • Apr 2016
  • Mar 2016
  • Feb 2016
  • Jan 2016
  • Dec 2015
  • Nov 2015
  • Oct 2015
  • Sep 2015
  • Aug 2015
  • Jul 2015
  • Jun 2015
  • May 2015
  • Apr 2015
  • Mar 2015
  • Feb 2015
  • Jan 2015
  • Apr 2014
  • Dec 2013
  • Jun 2013
  • Nov 2012
  • Apr 2012
  • Mar 2012
  • Nov 2011
  • Oct 2011
  • May 2010
  • Oct 2009
  • Sep 2009
  • May 2007
  • Feb 2004
  • Sep 1997
  • Dec 1993
  • Dec 1990
  • Oct 1990
  • Dec 1983

Categories

  • Africa
    • Burundi
    • Ivory Coast
    • Libya
    • Mali
    • Mozambique
    • Rwanda
  • Anti-Capitalism
    • Anti-Austerity
  • Anti-Fascism
  • Anti-Imperialism
  • Anti-Totalitarianism
  • Anti-War
  • Asia
    • Eurasia
    • Turkey
  • Civic Engagement (Activism)
    • Environmental Activism
    • Feminism
      • Women's Reproductive Rights
  • Comedy
  • Critical Theory
    • critical media literacy
  • Democracy Deferred
  • Documentary Film
  • Education
    • Critical Pedagogy
  • Fiction
  • First Amendment (U.S. Constitution)
    • Freedom of Speech
    • Freedom of the Press
  • Free Speech
  • Global Labour Movement
    • collective bargaining
  • Globalisation
  • Historical Archives
  • History
    • French History: 19th Century
    • U.S. History: 19th Century
    • U.S. History: 20th Century
  • Immigration
  • Indigenous Rights
  • International Trade
  • Latin America
    • Honduras
    • México
  • Linguistics
    • Cognitive Linguistics
  • Marxian Theory (Marxism)
  • Mindfulness
  • Music
    • History of Bluegrass
    • History of Chicano Rock
    • History of Cuban Music
    • History of Electronic
    • History of European Classical
    • History of Folk
    • History of Funk
    • History of Gospel
    • History of Hindustani Classical
    • History of Hip Hop
    • History of Holiday Music
    • History of Jazz (Black Classical)
    • History of Mexican Song
      • History of Norteño
      • History of Tejano
    • History of Reggae
    • History of Rhythm & Blues
    • History of Rock and Roll
      • History of Alternative Country (Americana)
      • History of Chicano Rock
      • History of Metal
      • History of Pop Music
    • History of Soul
  • Neoliberalism
  • Organised Religion
  • Philosophy
    • Dr. Georg Wilhelm Friedrich Hegel (1770–1831)
    • Philosophy of Education
      • Critical Pedagogy
  • Police State
  • Political Economy
    • History of Economic Theory
      • Dr. Karl Marx (1818-1883)
    • Macroeconomic Analysis
      • Modern Monetary Theory (MMT)
      • Open Economy Macroeconomics
    • Microeconomic Analysis
      • urban economics
      • Worker Self-Directed Enterprises
    • Political Science
      • Democratic Party (USA)
      • Republican Party (USA)
  • Political Prisoners
  • Presidential Election 2016
  • Prison Abolition
  • Racism (phenotype)
  • Science
    • Digital Technology
    • Evolutionary Biology
    • Medicine
    • Pyschology & Psychiatry
  • Social Theory
  • Sociology
  • Uncategorized
  • Underclass Debate

Meta

  • Register
  • Log in

Create a free website or blog at WordPress.com.

Cancel
Privacy & Cookies: This site uses cookies. By continuing to use this website, you agree to their use.
To find out more, including how to control cookies, see here: Cookie Policy
%d bloggers like this: