Jake Johnson at Common Dreams writes—Elizabeth Warren: Democrats Will Keep Losing Until the Entire Party Is 'Willing to Take on the Billionaire Class'
Several Senate Democrats were deeply offended when their colleague Sen. Elizabeth Warren (D-Mass.) publicly called them out by name for backing a bank deregulation bill that will heighten the chances of yet another devastating financial crisis, but that hasn't deterred the Massachusetts senator from continuing to denounce members of her own party for cozying up to corporate power.
In a new interview on Mehdi Hasan's "Deconstructed" podcast, Warren said she agrees with Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.) that too many Democrats lack the "guts" to take on Wall Street and argued that her party's struggles will continue until all of its members are "willing to take on the billionaire class."
"Until we have all of the Democrats who are willing to fight for the American people and not for a handful of billionaires and giant corporations, then it's going to stay an uphill fight," Warren argued.
The Massachusetts senator went on to note that Democrats' refusal to take on Wall Street greed and criminality is part of a broader, systemic crisis that has infected the entire American political system.
"Citizens United is taking the legs out from underneath democracy. And we have to be willing to overturn Citizens United," Warren said. "I get it that it's hard. But we can't give up on it, because money is going to drown our democracy. And if we don't start fighting back and fighting back more aggressively, then we are part of the problem as well." [...]
Here is the entire interview.
TOP COMMENTS • HIGH IMPACT STORIES
QUOTATION
“A diplomatic statement ... is a statement of which everything is true but the sentiment which seems to prompt it.” ~~Joseph Conrad, Victory (1915)
TWEET OF THE DAY
BLAST FROM THE PAST
On this date at Daily Kos in 2003—Delusions:
The war is not over is a phrase you'll just have to get used to. Because it isn't closer to over.
Our allies are not going to join us in Iraq in large numbers. What parliament is going to vote to send thousands of troops to join an occupation which is bitterly opposed by most of their population. Who is going to suggest that they send their troops to patrol Falluja?
How the US could have planned to wage this war without allies support is beyond me. Rummy and his chickenhawk planners had their fun planning the war but they forgot to plan the peace. Now, you have a population both humiliated and angered at an occupation which they feel is leading to them turning into the next Palestinians.
At the same time, US leaders expect other countries, who were not consulted, to jump in and join our war. Where are the Spanish and Italian troops? Staying home. Why? Because their governments would fall if they suggested sending troops to Iraq. There is absolutely no support for that.
The UN interventions have relied on large numbers of Pakistani and Bangladeshi troops to provide bulk. Are we to expect they're going to occupy a muslim country for our benefit?
On today’s Kagro in the Morning show, @DemFromCT imposes order on a chaotic weekend. Trump smashes alliances, slobbers over dictators and chews up the paper. (No puppet! *sniff*) What if GOP Senators defected? Have the Russians reinvented warfare? Might our allies reinvent sanctions?
RadioPublic|LibSyn|YouTube|Patreon|Square Cash (Share code: Send $5, get $5!)