sell your ride
post your service
sell your stuff
post your class
browse all jobs
post a job
homes for sale
for sale by owner
post your listing
If you're looking for "I Spys," dating or LTRs, this is your scene.
If you're looking for full-on kink or group play, you'll get what you need here.
Kaya- By that logic, Donald Trump is a political revolutionary.
Taking Chomsky's quote at face value [which I don't always do] it is a sad commentary on how the country has changed that Bernie is viewed as threatening by anyone today. The "Reagan Revolution" certainly at least started us on the sad path we are on now. Judith, if you would feel more comfortable just calling Bernie a "Counter-Reagan Revolutionary" I'd compromise and not quibble with your historical memory of the 60's, when perhaps you were a little, shall we say, impaired.
Is the article suppose to bring Bernie supporters back to the dem party so we can vote for Hillary? That is a mistake! Hillary is no better than any GOP candidate we've seen in decades. You just want to label the White House as "Democratic" and then just come back online and be a radical? That's a mistake. Either you are radical all the time either you are not. This street versus poll attitude I do not like. It's fake and it does more harm to us the true radicals, rather than good. It puts the masses to sleep. People say "ow it's a democrat let's vote for him/her and we did a good deed" well I hate to break it but you are wrong. Bernie or nobody in the White House. Cheers from a true radical on the streets and online.
It's an interesting article, thanks for writing. My question is, for all that you've read about revolutions, have you read or listened to what Bernie defined as his revolution? He refers to a more politically engaged grassroots in our democracy. So I think the way you talk about revolution is facetious when referencing Bernie. Surely, with the level of disengagement and nonchalance about politics in America, it's not unfair to call a more involved public discourse and and a demand to actually be represented a "revolutionary idea", considering the state of our political affairs.
First off, I apologize for not seeing this article until ten days after it was posted. That said I would like to briefly shed some light on the real reasons why Donald Trump has grown so popular.
People all over the western world - not just Americans, but Canadians and Europeans as well, are growing dreadfully tired of their nations, culture, and heritage being shat upon by the omnipresent liberal intelligentsia who must at all times remind the common people of how evil, stupid, or generally unworthy they are of having their interests looked out for.
It is the persistent hatred directed against the people and against the nations by the aforementioned intelligentsia which has made Donald Trump so popular, for Trump cares not about obscure global interests, nor globetrotting bankers, but about the American people.
It should serve as no surprise, then, that the perpetrators of this toxic scourge squirm in agony at the mere though of losing their grasp on the nations. However painful it may be, it is happening, and it is happening with certainty.
Judith Levine's foul spewing of buzzwords, false assertions, and dirty language serves no purpose other than to further erode away at the morale of the American people and, like the stagnant river of Judaic garbage to come before it, should not be taken as even the slightest bit legitimate.
Actually, the Lena Chen case is a bad example. Anyone who knows the backstory knows that Chen didn't just "blog openly about her sex life"...she actually posted some of the nude photos she later whined everyone was looking at! (No, I won't post links; just google a bit.)
That is all very nice (what this commenter writes), but that is not the full story. Imagining "McAllister's penis in the mouth of an unwilling woman" is not even the half of it. To understand the full revolting nature of the offences charged, I invite you to scrutinize the conduct of Vlad the Impaler. Vlad (1456) ran the fiefdom of Romania-Moldova, and intimidated potential rivals, and disposed of actual rivals, by the practice of impalement. To be succinct, this exercise was carried out at the dinner banquet, with the various chieftains assembled. The nude miscreant was brought in during the meal, and a sharpened pole inserted into the rectum, then up through the torso soft tissue, to exit out the mouth. The pole was then placed at the dining table, so the impaled would wriggle like a worm during the banquet. Obey Vlad.
The 21st Century Vermont variation on this is McAllister's (charged) practice of "fisting." The insertion of a fist into the vaginal cavity is hardly a "sex act." What horrifies the Senators is that Mr. McAllister is unable to comprehend that "fisting" is criminal assault, a disturbed violence. The inability to understand the criminal nature of this conduct is very much similar to the spectacle of Coach Jerry Sandusky and sex assaults on young boys, being led to jail with a face of bewilderment as to what is happening.
The Senate cannot survive the spectacle of a Senator doing "fisting" and having that splattered over the news pages (and, ultimately, over the Court-reporter news pages). It so contaminates the Senate that no Senator can hold his head up at any community meeting, or even walking down the street. It is simply too awful. So, there is no real choice: McAllister had to go.
I agree with this article custody must not be provided to such people.Why other people suffer just because of them once they had committed mistake they can repeater the same mistake again.So eventually custody should not be provided.My friend had faces the problem of being raped an the case is being handled buy family law lawyer Centreville, VA
I’m not a regular Judith Levine fan, but since 9/11 I have been noting how much our country has in common with our supposed enemies. More and more we justify our carnage as directed by God. God was not the base of American politics when I was growing up. Remember how afraid we were that President Kennedy would be taking orders from the Pope? And more and more I find others with the same perspective, often surprised that I share their views, and more surprised that I take the anti-American action of talking about it out loud. It is becoming more and more dangerous to be an American in America as the “radical Christian jihad” army intimidates America.
Oh Rudiger! "The entire vidieos are all available to the public. But pp is selling human body parts..."
Yes, the "vidieos" are available, and they don't show that PP is _selling_ human body parts. Thus editing for the purpose of making the false claim about PP's practices can be called a "hoax." Hoax seems nicer than "malicious hate-spreading lie." I applaud Ms. Levine's restraint.
And, yes, Ms. Levine is an ideologue, but at least she's backing her ideas with facts and humanistic ideas and not simplistic denunciations that withhold human rights to half the population.
Perhaps you'd like to make a salient point, Ringo.
the anti-abortion Center for Medical Progress' video hoax, edited to create the false impression that the health care provider is trafficking in fetal body p
Boy, ms Levine is an ideologue. A hoax? The entire vidieos are all available to the public.
But pp is selling human body parts and that looks bad for poor abortion and sex industry that Levine peddles. So the prolife movement t must be demonized.
For men to grow up, they must recognize women as equals, people like themselves
look at what she implies! Men, naturally, all men, don't think of women as people!
This is the bitter ravings of a 70s has been! Go Bernie sanders!
Equality, not protection, is the antidote to sexual violence.
Ah yes! That's clear! Thanks ms Levine!
But every kid knows that getting high is fun and sex feels good.
Is this the values that we want for our children, ms Levine is a radical
I'm the first to admit Hillary's scripted laughs and faked talk show appearances are hard to watch. But I challenge all detractors to watch her speech at the Brookings Institute about the Iran Deal. Watch her testify in Congress. She's the most politically experienced candidate in modern history. She knows firsthand the responsibilities and frustrations a President deals with, and is the most equipped to tackle the tough foreign and domestic issues our country faces, especially when all legislation needs to go through a likely GOP House.
"Repeating the same slogans shows a lack of substance and willingness to engage on critical issues."
Those are your words.
So, according to you, Bernie has shown a lack of substance and willingness to engage since, oh, about 1970. If you saw a video of Bernie speaking 20 years ago, you'd hear exactly the same slogans you're hearing today. Exactly the same.
If I had to choose between Hillary and Bernie, I'd have to go with the Bern. Although he is promising lots of free stuff and has not really accomplished much in 24 years in DC, he is at least an honest person and he doesn't follow polls and lie to help his cause.
Hillary on the other hand, has a proven legacy of lies and deceit. Although Judith suggests she survived the Bengazi hearing 'unscathed', on a simple question she blatantly lied. Remember the blame placed on the You Tube video? That same night she emailed Chelsea to let her know it was a planned terrorist attack. (What about all those pleas for additional security by our Ambassador leading up to the attack?)
And what about those missing emails? As Secretary of State, was her server hacked by the Russians and Chinese? The fact that 'she' and in turn 'we' didn't accomplish anything in this crazy world during her term is due to the other sides basically knowing our tactics and plans. Any laws broken?
She is evil. Why don't the masses who support her acknowledge her ways? If she were to get to the White House, things would be so far over her capabilities and things would get worse...
I'm trying to better understand why I should vote for Bern. I base this on the premise he is an honest guy. I'd have a beer with Bernie. As for Hillary, if I can't get past the dishonest piece, I'm not going to even try to understand her platforms. Do you believe her? Can you trust her? I'd pass on having a glass of wine with her.
"Hillary keeps repeating the same slogans. And Bernie thoughtfully explores new territory? Her positions have "evolved," while he hasn't changed his mind since the Eisenhower era - as if this were a demerit in her column and a plus in his." They are valid demerits in her column. Repeating the same slogans shows a lack of substance and willingness to engage on critical issues. Sanders does explore new territory. How could anyone think he does not? He is forcing a conversation that few politicians have the ethics (and bravery) to address. Regarding her "evolution" on the issues, these are also a very real demerit in her column. I find it hard to believe that new information, thoughtfully considered in terms of the greater good has influenced her flips and flops. I think the bulk of new information she has considered is public sentiment and how an "evolution" could improve her chances at the polls. Bernie Sanders has stood by positions that contribute to the greater good; positions that have been unpopular to establishment politicians who don't want to alienate their wealthy benefactors. Clinton proves she advocates for herself and the donors who support her. Clinton's has earned these valid and substantive demerits. This "madness" stems from enduring sexism and internalized sexism? I think this criticisms against Clinton stem from the stark contrast between her positions and those of Sanders, and from enthusiasm about a leader who finally stands for those of us who have not had a voice because we don't have enough money to buy political influence. To blame it on sexism or internalized sexism shows a stunning disconnection from the reality that drives Sander's support and valid criticisms against Clinton, and I say this as a woman who has studied critical theory for many years.
Hillary Clinton, gag. I'm glad Judith has proclaimed Hillary Clinton the democratic nominee and informed us that she will be living to be 140 years old. I wish I could have the part of my life I spent reading this article back.