Featured Image -- 2283

No 1159 “En mi opinión” Febrero 19, 2016

No 1159   “En mi opinión”   Febrero 19, 2016

“IN GOD WE TRUST” Lázaro R Gonzalez Miño  Editor

Lázaro R González Miño  para  Alcalde de Miami

    

AMENPER: Debate Demócrata

Hay que ser objetivos y sinceros, la realidad es que aunque tengo simpatías con los republicanos, no puedo negar que es mucho más satisfactorio oír los debates demócratas.

Los republicanos se ponen a discutir por cosas feas, lo demócratas de ponen a discutir por cosas agradables, se ponen a discutir cuál es el que nos va a regalar más cosas.

Cómo nos van a regalar cosas esa gente, los dos candidatos se pelean por ver quién va a regalar más cosas, vamos a tener seguro de salud gratis, cada uno más gratis que el otro, vamos a tener beneficios que nos permitirán recibir dinero y vivienda sin pagar nada, nuestros hijos van a poder ir a cualquier universidad sin tener que pagar nada,  no tenemos que preocuparnos por la defensa nacional porque si uno de ellos sale, nuestros enemigos se convertirán en nuestros amigos. 

Esto es una maravilla, es algo fantástico, no había oído nada mejor que esto desde que mi abuelita me contó sobre los reyes magos. 

¿Se acuerdan?, que maravilla, todo que había que hacer una cartica y lo recibíamos todo,  ni nosotros ni nuestros padres tenían que hacer nada, los reyes magos lo pagaban todo.

Nunca me puse a pensar de donde sacaban el dinero los reyes magos para repartir tantos juguetes.

Pero claro yo tenía cinco años, y no pensaba en esas cosas secundaria cómo de donde sale el dinero.

Lo que me sorprende es cómo hay tantas personas que piensan ahora igual que yo cuando tenía cinco años.

No saben, o no quieren saber de dónde sale el dinero, simplemente les gusta escuchar los cuentos de Santa Claus y los reyes magos, debatiendo en la televisión como candidatos demócratas, para ver qué nos va a regalar más cosas con el dinero de los demás.

Me gusta oír que vamos a tener tantas cosas de gratis, y casi me quedo dormido durante el debate, por el estado de satisfacción, ya no tengo que trabajar más, ¡que sabroso!.

 Pero cuando terminó y me puse a pensar lo que me esperaba con ese candidato Bernie Sanders que quiere que le dé el 95% de lo que gano para que él lo reparta, y la otra candidata Hillary Benghazi Clinton que quiere todavía ser más dadivosa que Bernie con nuestro dinero. No me pude dormir, me acosté y me tuve que levantar para escribir este E Mail a las 3 de la madrugada, que se los voy a pasar mañana

La verdad que cuando uno analiza la cultura de dependencia que han creado estos Santa Claus y Reyes Magos, cuando pensamos lo que nos espera con una candidata por un lado que abandona a nuestras tropas en combate, y el otro que quiere resolver el  problema sin pelear rindiéndose a enemigo, cualquiera pierde el sueño.

Hay una canción que lo dice:”Melchor Gaspar y el negro Baltazar…” me la cantaba mi abuelita de chico y solo recuerdo esa parte.  Pero sé que Baltasar era el que llevaba el oro así que es obvio que es el que más regalaba.  

Por el otro lado está Santa Claus que es el rey mago americano que todavía regala más.

El debate demócrata es realmente una confrontación entre el Negro Baltazar y Santa Claus, debatiendo cuál de ellos va a regalar más. 

Viéndolo de esa manera me parece que es más divertido, podemos transferir nuestra mente a cuando teníamos cinco años y disfrutar el debate con alegría infantil.

 

 

 

AMENPER: De tal manera amó Dios al mundo

Evangelio de San JuanPorque de tal manera amó Dios al mundo, que ha dado a su Hijo unigénito, para que todo aquel que en él cree, no se pierda, mas tenga vida eterna.

O sea lo que dice Juan en este versículo del evangelio es que el ser cristiano es algo para todo el mundo, y que el requisito es la aceptación personal del sacrificio de Cristo. 

No podemos juzgar si alguien es cristiano o no lo es, eso es entre Dios y la persona.

Dios, que es el único que puede ver lo que nosotros realmente pensamos.

Tengo que defender a Donald Trump por las declaraciones de Francisco. 

Porque aunque yo pudiera pensar igual que Francisco que Trump no es cristiano, sería una apreciación personal, por el otro pasaje bíblico que dice que “por sus frutos lo conocerán”.

Pero lo que diría es que un cristiano no debiera tener cierta conducta, nadie tiene la autoridad para decir que Trump o cualquiera otra persona no es un cristiano. 

O sea que diría que no parece un cristiano, que no actua en su vida como un cristiano,  pero no puedo decir que no es cristiano porque el ser cristiano es una cuestión personal entre el individuo y la aceptación del sacrificio de Cristo. 

No por su religión ni por una conducta particular, porque todos somos pecadores, por eso tuvo Cristo que venir al mundo y por eso vino, para que pudieran ser perdonados esos pecados con su sacrificio vicario de eso se trata el cristianismo verdadero. 

Y cuando Cristo vino al mundo en su pueblo había muchas religiones, los fariseos, los saduceos, los esenios y numerosas sectas judías todas basadas en la ley de Moisés.

Jesucristo no se nombró miembro de una religión, atacó a los fariseos, que se decían doctores de las escrituras, no por lo creían, porque en lo que creían era la ley de Dios, pero los llamó hipócritas porque no se comportaban de acuerdo con lo que predicaban. 

Pero fariseos eran la mayoría de los seguidores de Cristo, y un fariseo fue San Pablo, fariseo de fariseos y miembro del Sanedrín, y Cristo lo escogió para predicar entre los gentiles.

Cristo no vino para derogar la ley judaica de una secta determinada, pero para que con su sacrificio se consumara la ley de Moises, de la condena de muerte por el pecado, muriendo el por todos los pecadores, esto es el puro cristianismo.

Pero Caifás, el papa de los fariseos, obligó a Poncio Pilatos para que lo crucificara, porque Caifás más que un sacerdote defensor de la ley mosaica, era un político que le hacía juego a los romanos y lo que más le importaba era su posición, era su control de la religión mayor de aquella época en Israel.

Lo que deja abierto el Papa Francisco con su conducta, es que muchos pudieran pensar que el Papa es como Caifás, que es un político con una ideología y una agenda, y no es un verdadero cristiano. 

Aunque decir esto también está incorrecto, porque nadie puede juzgar el cristianismo de otro.

Después de todo cuando se le preguntó sobre el régimen de Raúl Castro dijo “¿quién soy yo para juzgar a otro?” así que él entiende bien el concepto del cristianismo, pero a veces se le olvida.

Pero lo puede probar, puede probar que es un cristiano sincero, podemos decirle como Reagan dijo a Gorbachov, tumbe esa muralla. 

Tumbe la muralla de Vaticano y deje que entren todos y se puedan apropiar de los tesoros del Vaticano, sólo entonces puede decir es sincero en su pensar de que es correcto dejar que entren todos en los Estados Unidos, para que crucen indiscriminadamente sus fronteras y se apropien de las riquezas del país americano, entonces podría hablar con propiedad. 

Que abra las fronteras de la Ciudad del Vaticano.

No creo en la infalibilidad del Papa, es mi opinión particular, pero aunque creyera, esto no se trata de la infalibilidad del Papa que es solamente en asuntos doctrinales, estamos hablando de un individuo llamado Francisco, haciendo una proposición política, entrando a criticar a un candidato, haciendo algo que por cierto es como un apoyo al candidato, comportándose como Caifás.

No creo que Trump pudiera haber tenido un golpe de suerte mayor que estas declaraciones de Francisco, le ha asegurado la victoria en South Carolina. 

Porque los evangélicos y protestantes se agudizarán en contra del papado, y la mayoría de los católicos, que son reamente nominales, no realmente creyentes de la denominación, se volverán también contra las declaraciones del Papa, y todo esto beneficia a Trump.

Y para mí este es el daño mayor que nos ha hecho este político llamado Francisco.

 

 

 

 

Bernie Sanders Top 20 Contributors, 2011-2016. “EMO” Here you have the comunist in USA. Lázaro R González Minno Editor.

Select cycle and data to include:

 

Senator Bernie Sanders has reported a total of 24,018 contributions ($200 or more) totaling $10,676,737 in 2013-2014.

Top 20 Contributors to Campaign Cmte

Rank Contributor Hires lobbyists? Lobbying firm?* Lobbyist(s)
give to
member?
Total Indivs PACs
1 UNITE HERE $15,000 $0 $15,000
2 Communications Workers of America $13,500 $0 $13,500
3 National League of Postmasters $12,500 $0 $12,500
4 Service Employees International Union $11,000 $3,000 $8,000
5 National Nurses United $10,250 $250 $10,000
6 American Crystal Sugar $10,000 $0 $10,000
6 American Postal Workers Union $10,000 $0 $10,000
6 Credit Union National Assn $10,000 $0 $10,000
6 DANPAC $10,000 $0 $10,000
6 International Assn of Fire Fighters $10,000 $0 $10,000
6 Machinists/Aerospace Workers Union $10,000 $0 $10,000
6 National Assn of Letter Carriers $10,000 $0 $10,000
6 National Assn of Postal Supervisors $10,000 $0 $10,000
6 National Assn of Realtors $10,000 $0 $10,000
6 Operating Engineers Union $10,000 $0 $10,000
6 Searchlight Leadership Fund $10,000 $0 $10,000
17 American Assn for Justice $9,500 $500 $9,000
17 United Food & Commercial Workers Union $9,500 $0 $9,500
19 National Education Assn $9,100 $600 $8,500
20 American Federation of Teachers $8,700 $200 $8,500

*registrants, or active lobbying firm

This table lists the top donors to this candidate in 2011-2016. The organizations themselves did not donaterather the money came from the organizations’ PACs, their individual members or employees or owners, and those individuals’ immediate families. Organization totals include subsidiaries and affiliates.

Why (and How) We Use Donors’ Employer/Occupation Information

METHODOLOGY

NOTE: All the numbers on this page are for 2011-2016and based on Federal Election Commission data available electronically on echo Sunday, January 31, 2016. (“Help! The numbers don’t add up…”)

https://www.opensecrets.org/politicians/contrib.php?cycle=Career&cid=n00000528
Sen. Bernie Sanders

Select data type:         Federal data State data

Select source of funds:          Campaign + Outside Groups Candidate Committee only Outside Groups only

This page shows contributions grouped by contributor to the candidate’s campaign committee plus any super PACs or hybrid PACs working on his or her behalf.

Contributor Total
Alphabet Inc $98,810
University of California $33,598
Microsoft Corp $31,148
Apple Inc $28,442
Amazon.com $18,846
US Navy $15,595
Kaiser Permanente $15,514
University of Illinois $14,780
Columbia University $12,293
IBM Corp $12,040
Rutgers University $11,803
US Postal Service $11,126
Intel Corp $11,009
US Air Force $10,369
EMC Corp $10,310
Business Matters in the Visual Arts $10,000
Stanford University $9,914
Facebook Inc $9,857
University of Michigan $9,750
New York University $9,650

This table lists the top donors to this candidate in the 2016 cycle. The money came from the organizations’ PACs; their individual members, employees or owners; and those individuals’ immediate families. At the federal level, the organizations themselves did not donate, as they are prohibited by law from doing so. Organization totals include subsidiaries and affiliates.

Why (and How) We Use Donors’ Employer/Occupation Information

NOTE: Federal-level numbers are for the 2016 election cycle and based on Federal Election Commission data released electronically on Sunday, January 31, 2016.

Feel free to distribute or cite this material, but please credit the Center for Responsive Politics. For permission to reprint for commercial uses, such as textbooks, contact the Center: info@crp.org
https://www.opensecrets.org/pres16/contrib.php?id=N00000528&

 

Sen. Bernie Sanders

Source of Funds (Campaign Cmte Only), 2011-2016

Pie Chart

  Individual Contributions
– Small Individual Contributions
– Large Individual Contributions
$1,161,118
$841,825 (70%)
$319,292 (27%)
(97%)
PAC Contributions $15,255 (1%)
Candidate self-financing $933,171 (78%)
Other $-912,637 (-76%)

https://www.opensecrets.org/politicians/summary.php?cid=N00000528

 

 

 

 

 

Pope: Trump Is ‘Not Christian’

Pope Francis forcefully injected himself into the U.S. presidential campaign on Thursday, assailing Republican candidate Donald Trump’s views on U.S. immigration as “not Christian” in a sign of growing international concern at the billionaire businessman’s election prospects.

Trump struck back. No stranger to controversy, the longtime party front-runner in national opinion polls dismissed the leader of the world’s Roman Catholics as “disgraceful” for questioning his faith. He said he was a proud Christian.

Francis told reporters during a free-wheeling conversation on his flight home from a visit to Mexico, “A person who thinks only about building walls, wherever they may be, and not building bridges, is not Christian.”

Trump has accused Mexico of sending rapists and drug runners across the United States’ southern border and has vowed if elected president to build a wall to keep out immigrants who enter illegally.

It was not the first time U.S. allies have voiced concern over comments by Trump.

More than half a million Britons signed a petition to bar him from entering Britain, where he has business interests, in response to his call to ban Muslims from entering the United States. British lawmakers decided against a ban as a violation of free speech.

Asked if American Catholics should vote for someone with Trump’s views, Francis said, “I am not going to get involved in that. I say only that this man is not Christian if he has said things like that. We must see if he said things in that way and in this I give the benefit of the doubt.”

It remained to be seen if the pope’s comments would strengthen Trump in the run-up to the Nov. 8 election. Trump’s swipes at rival candidates and heated exchanges with others have bolstered his standing in nominating contests and opinion polls.

One of Trump’s rivals, Republican presidential candidate Jeb Bush, speaking in Columbia, South Carolina, said he would not question anyone’s relationship with God. But Bush, a Catholic, said, “It only enables bad behavior when someone from outside our country talks about Donald Trump.”

ISLAMIC STATE

Trump, a real estate developer and former reality TV show host, said, “If and when the Vatican is attacked by ISIS, which as everyone knows is ISIS’s ultimate trophy, I can promise you that the pope would have only wished and prayed that Donald Trump would have been president.”

Trump was in South Carolina, which on Saturday will hold a Republican nominating contest.

He said that in Mexico the pope heard one side of the story and did not see what Trump called the crime, drug trafficking and negative economic impact Mexico’s policies had on the United States.

Thomas Groome, director of the Boston College Center on the Church in the 21st Century, said Francis’ comments were entirely in keeping with his focus on mercy.

Latest News Update

Special: Barbara Walters Refuses to Return to the View, Due to This Secret

“The pope is commissioned to preach the Gospel of Jesus Christ. That’s his job,” Groome said. “So when he was asked a direct question, he gave Trump the benefit of the doubt, he said we have to be sure he said this, but if he said this, it is not Christian.”

“People often think, ‘You can’t question my faith,’ but of course we can …,” Groome said. “There are rules … we call them commandments and if you deny them or ignore them you can’t just say, ‘I’m a good Christian.'”

Groome called Trump’s suggestion that Islamic State militants would target the Vatican egregious. “Now it becomes a challenge to ISIS,” he said.

Patrick Hornbeck, chairman of the department of theology at Fordham University in New York, said Francis’ words were not surprising given the poverty he had just seen in Mexico.

“There is very little common ground between Pope Francis and Donald Trump,” Hornbeck said. He predicted the pope’s words on electoral politics would have little effect on any U.S. Catholics who liked Trump as a candidate.

“Those who are in favor of Trump already will see this as confirmation of why they favor him and those who oppose him are going to see this as a confirmation of why they oppose him.”

 

‘A POLITICAL PERSON’

Trump has said he would deport millions of illegal immigrants if he wins the White House. Last week, responding to the pope’s plan to visit the U.S.-Mexican border, he said Pope Francis did not understand the issues.

“The pope is a very political person … I don’t think he understands the danger of the open border that we have with Mexico,” Trump told the Fox Business Network last week.

Asked about being called a “political person”, Francis said on Thursday, “Thank God he said I was a politician because Aristotle defined the human person as ‘animal politicus.’ So at least I am a human person.”

Republican Catholics appear to support Trump more than other Republicans do, according to a Reuters/Ipsos opinion poll. It shows 43 percent of likely Republican Catholic voters support Trump, compared to 38 percent of Republican voters generally.

The Pew Research Center has said 71 percent of the U.S. population identifies as Christian. This includes the 21 percent of the U.S. population that identifies as Catholic.

The pope was winning the social media battle on Thursday with overall sentiment for Trump negative and for Francis positive, according to social media analytic firm Zoomph. Author Dan Dicker @Dan_Dicker tweeted, “Let’s see @realDonaldTrump insult his way out of this.”

Trump’s social media director Dan Scavino @DanScavino tweeted, “Amazing comments from the Pope – considering Vatican City is 100 percent surrounded by massive walls.”

Evangelical Christian leader Jerry Falwell Jr., who has endorsed Trump, described him as generous to his employees and family, adding, “I’m convinced he’s a Christian. I believe he has faith in Jesus Christ.”

Trump was not always at odds with the pope. In 2013, the year Francis began his papacy, Trump compared himself to the pope favorably. “The new Pope is a humble man, very much like me, which probably explains why I like him so much!” Trump tweeted on Christmas Day 2013.
Breaking News at Newsmax.com 
http://www.newsmax.com/Newsfront/trump-pope-not-christian/2016/02/18/id/714978/#ixzz40d00ptZH 
Urgent: Rate Obama on His Job Performance.
 Vote Here Now!

 

 

 

Rubio Told Spanish TV He Backed Amnesty, Keeping Obama’s Executive Orders

By Todd Beamon   |   

Marco Rubio has supported amnesty for illegal immigrants in several interviews on Spanish television, while speaking against it on the campaign trail and in Saturday’s Republican debate in South Carolina, the vice chairman of the Republican Party of Miami-Dade County in Florida said Thursday.

“My fellow Miamian wants to have it both ways,” Manny Roman wrote in an op-ed piece at Breitbart News. “He wants to do the rounds on Spanish media pandering to their viewers and then go in front of the American people, in English … and pretend to hold a conservative position on immigration.”

Roman, who also is Hispanic-American, said that Rubio touted amnesty in these interviews on Univision, the large Spanish-language cable television network:

  • Last April, he said that he would not immediately rescind President Barack Obama’s 2012 executive order creating the Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals program because it helped many people. “I wouldn’t undo it [DACA] immediately, as it is already benefiting a lot of people,” he said.
  • In discussing the Gang of Eight bill in June 2013, Rubio said that “first comes legalization of those here illegally, then comes border security.” He added that legalization was not conditional.
  • In the same interview, the senator said that “the vast majority of Republicans in Congress and throughout the country support a pathway to citizenship.”
  • During the Senate vote on the Gang of Eight bill in 2013, Rubio said that not granting citizenship to illegal immigrants currently in the United States was immoral because it “would create two tiers of residents in this country.” He added that he would lobby his “conservative colleagues in Congress hard” to get the amnesty bill passed.

“Marco Rubio’s back-and-forth, misleading statements in the last debate regarding his comments to the Spanish press is unacceptable for someone aspiring to become president of the United States,” Roman said.
Breaking News at Newsmax.com 
http://www.newsmax.com/Headline/marco-rubio-backed-amnesty-barack-obama/2016/02/18/id/715066/#ixzz40dAsmn4W 
Urgent: Rate Obama on His Job Performance.
 Vote Here Now!

 

 

 

Does Bernie Sanders Know What He’s Doing?

by Pachacutec

Bernie Sanders is taking a lot of heat for making promises everyone agrees can’t be achieved in today’s Washington. However, Sanders is not just smoking free-love-sixties-dope when he talks about universal health care, free college tuition, stopping deportations, and drastically cutting the prison population.

I used to teach negotiation to MBA students and lawyers seeking CLE credit, and have included negotiation content in executive coaching and other consulting work I do. One of the things I’ve sometimes taught was how to use audience effects to gain leverage in negotiations. The best story I know to illustrate this comes from Gandhi, from his autobiography.

 

Gandhi Rides First Class

Gandhi’s early years as an activist led him to South Africa, where he advocated as a lawyer for the rights of Indians there. One discriminatory law required “coolie” Indians to ride third class on trains. Soon after arriving in South Africa, Gandhi himself had been thrown off a train for seating himself in first class.

Looking for a way to challenge the law, he dressed flawlessly and purchased a first class ticket face to face from an agent who turned out to be a sympathetic Hollander, not a Transvaaler. Boarding the train, Gandhi knew the conductor would try to throw him off, so he very consciously looked for and found a compartment where an English, upper class gentleman was seated, with no white South Africans around. He politely greeted his compartment mate and settled into his seat for the trip.

Sure enough, when the conductor came, he immediately told Gandhi to leave. Gandhi presented his ticket, and the conductor told him it didn’t matter, no coolies in first class. The law was on his side. But the English passenger intervened, “What do you mean troubling this gentleman? Don’t you see he has a first class ticket? I don’t mind in the least his traveling with me.” He turned to Gandhi and said, “You should make yourself comfortable where you are.”

The conductor backed down. “If you want to ride with a coolie, what do I care?”

And that, my friends, illustrates the strategic use of creating an audience effect to gain leverage in a negotiated conflict. The tactic can be applied in any negotiated conflict where an outside stakeholder party can be made aware of the conflict and subsequently influence its outcome.

 

It’s the Conflict, Stupid

A couple of weeks ago, members of the neoliberal wonkosphere and others in the pundit class tut-tutted, fretted, and wearily explained to Sanders’ band of childish fools and hippies that his “theory of change” was wrong. Well, not merely wrong, but deceptive, deceitful, maybe even dangerous. False hopes, stakes are too high, and all that. This was Clinton campaign, and more to the point, political establishment ideology, pushback. When Ezra Klein starts voxsplaining how to catalyze a genuine social, cultural, and political movement, you know you’ve entered the land of unfettered bullshit.

Bernie Sanders, like Gandhi, Martin Luther King Jr., Franklin Delano Roosevelt, Occupy Wall Street, and Black Lives Matter before him, wants to use mass appeal audience effects to renegotiate the country’s political and economic contract. The strategy, writ small in Gandhi’s train ride tale, is perfectly applicable–and has proven successful through history–in bringing about successful, peaceful, radical change.

 

These movements operate by forcing conflict out into the open, on favorable terms and on favorable ground. Make the malignancy of power show its face in daylight. Gandhi and the salt march. MLK and the Selma to Montgomery marches. FDR picking fights and catalyzing popular support throughout theNew Deal era, starting with the first 100 days. OWS changed American language and political consciousness by cementing the frame of the 1% into the lexicon. BLM reminded America who it has been and still is on the streets of Ferguson.

 

One FDR snippet is instructive to consider in light all these discussions–and dismissals–of Sanders’ “theory of change.” As FDR watched progressive legislation be struck down by a majority conservative court, he famously proposed legislation that would have allowed him to add another justice. He failed,but:

In one sense, however, it succeeded: Justice Owen Roberts switched positions and began voting to uphold New Deal measures, effectively creating a liberal majority in West Coast Hotel Co. v. Parrish and National Labor Relations Board v. Jones & Laughlin Steel Corporation, thus departing from the Lochner v. New York era and giving the government more power in questions of economic policies. Journalists called this change “the switch in time that saved nine.”

This was a constitutional overreach by FDR, and it caused him political damage, but forcing the conflict created pressure on the Court, making its actions highly visible to the mass of people who wanted change, who voted for change, but did not always see or understand how the elite establishment acts to thwart change.

 

Your Mistakes are My Ladder

The paths to change for all of these movements are neither linear nor predictable. By nature, they act like guerilla movements. They force conflict and force an entrenched enemy into the open. Then, once exposed and vulnerable, the guerilla tactic is to attack opportunistically on strategically favorable ground. In peaceful social movements, “winning” means winning the hearts and minds of the majority of the society’s stakeholders to the point where they actively choose sides. First make them witnesses, then convert them into participants in the conflict. That’s exactly what Gandhi did with the Englishman in the first class compartment.

 

This is why calls from pundits and Camp Clinton for Bernie to lay out the fifteen point plan of how he gets from here to there are, at best, naïve. The social revolution playbook requires creating cycles of conflict and contrast, taking opportunistic advantage of your opponent’s mistakes. No one can predict with certainty where and how those opportunities will arise, though you can choose where to poke. If the Clinton campaign wants to know how Bernie can run that playbook in action, it need only review its own performance campaigning against him.

 

Does Sanders Have a Plan?

So, is Bernie Sanders the underpants gnome of political change? Is his theory “1) Call for revolution 2) ????? 3) Profit!”? Or does he have something else–some other historical precedents–in mind? Everything I hear and see from the Sanders campaign suggests the latter.

 

Take a look at this ad from Sanders:

To me, this ad says that Sanders understands very clearly what kind of coalition and movement he needs to ignite to accomplish the vision he’s putting out in his campaign. It’s an aspirational vision, sure. And neither he nor any movement he helps create can or will accomplish all of it, just as FDR was unable to accomplish all he set out to achieve. Still, accomplishing as much as FDR did, relatively speaking, would be pretty damn good. Democrats used to say they liked that sort of thing.

 

Or how about this ad, where Sanders is introduced by Erica Garner explicitly as a “protestor,” invoking the lineage of MLK:

 

Yes, I’d say Sanders has a very clear, and historically grounded “theory of change.” What those who question it’s validity are really saying is either: 1) they lack imagination and can’t’ see beyond the status quo; 2) they lack knowledge of history, including American history, or; 3) they understand Sanders’ “theory of change” very well and want to choke it in the crib as quickly as they can.

 

They may succeed. Elites may beat Sanders himself but they will not beat the movement he’s invigorating but did not create. However, saying Sanders may fail is not the same as saying he doesn’t know what he’s doing, or that what he’s setting out to accomplish is impossible.

Because, if history shows us anything, it is, indeed, possible. 

 

Does Bernie Sanders Know What He’s Doing? | Ian Welsh

 

LAZARO R GONZALEZ

Para Alcalde del Condado Miami Elecciones del 2016

Escriba el nombre de Lázaro R González en

el espacio de la boleta electoral en blanco

Si usted desea que tengamos un Alcalde en El Condado Miami que responda a los intereses de los ciudadanos que viven en este condado, usted no puede votar por los despirfarradores que han desgobernado a nustro condado. No p[odemos continuar con un ejercito de descarados que gastan el dinero del condado en cosas que no se deben hacer si realmente usted  quiere acabar el relajo, el robo, el abuso, el descaro, la mala administración y quiere que su gobierno condal le responda a usted y no que esto no sea un feudo de los políticos ladrones y descarados inescrupulosos, no permita más abusos, usted tiene una opción Lazaro R Gonzalez.

Envie nuestros mensajes a sus amigos y conocidos.

 “No pedimos donaciones de dinero”

LazaroRGonzalez@gmail.com LazaroRGonzalez@hotmail.com

“FREEDOM IS NOT FREE”

En mi opinión

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s