V.3

If this FAQ doesn't answer your question, submit it here and I'll try to answer within 48 hours (if an experienced user doesn't answer first). Please consider this in BETA stage and notify me of any bugs. When we get going in 2026, I'll need tech help, moderators and an admin. I'd rather be a creative contributor. It would be ideal to partner with other progressive organizations. IS THIS LIKE BLUESKY? No. I support BlueSky, but NewBluePlanet is a different format and focus. We invite you to build instead of scroll. And we have no intention to monetize your membership. NewBluePlanet was originally running during the Bush years. After election 2024, I re-developed it for 12 months as this non-profit community service. I REGISTERED. NOW WHAT? Comment on a forum post (not live chat) or post a short introduction to be upgraded to a Newbl Citizen. Citizens can additionally join the Liberal Hearts Club by adding their club profile. CAN I POST IMAGES? Only in your profile. If you prefer being bombarded with images, there are plenty of social networks for that. We want your thoughts and ideas. I'll be posting the best memes from properly linked sources who want them shared. CAN I POST ARTICLES? Quote a couple of lines, add your comments and link to the source. (see forum rules). CAN I BLOG? At some point, individual blogs will be implemented for writers who establish a following. IS THE LIBERAL HEARTS CLUB FOR ME? It's a tool for singles OR any person or couple interested in meeting like-minded friends. Viewing someone's friend profile and other site posts, can give you a good idea if you might like to invite them to participate in your party, game-night, pickle-ball, hike, hobby, political action, etc..

given that street or building protests only get as much attention as the media will allow, it is questionable how effective it can be. Of course, disrupting traffic or businesses gains attention but has legal ramifications. calling and writing officials and reps is helpful, but everyone knows it doesn't take much energy or commitment. So I doubt it moves the needle sufficiently. posting and sharing can be informative but the other side can post and share too. seems to me the winner is boycotting. If businesses' glutinous craving for profits brought out their monster, it can be tamed by withholding their meals. And posting and sharing can fuel the boycott and feed us.

to be clear, there's some talk about about dividing the country into 2 countries like the division of North Korea and a South Korea. Or some other configuration that would allow America's right-wing to do their things. Indeed, very complicated, but it deserves some contemplation given the extreme direction they're taking the whole country right now. off the top of my head, i think there may be some semi-reasonable options. Something that might take affect in, like a decade. Hell, i'd move to get out of hell if my state goes their way.

https://www.facebook.com/share/p/1CY1ARsXfA/

this list is highly speculative considering there are no candidates yet. I like Green credentials, but I'd never consider a Green Party candidate in the current 2-Party System. Like many, i believe in voting for the best representative of my priorities for America in the Primaries. But if asked who i'd like to see competing in the general election, i'd consider compromising a little in consideration of elect-ability. i think AOC and Bernie would be exciting "change" candidates but Bernie will be too old and AOC may be too young. I'd like to see Pete B in the VP slot. Newsom is the only one dealing with the king head-on, with a sense of urgency and a measure of cojones, so i believe he's earned my support. I'd have to see AOC and Gavin on the debate stage to decide.

if the question was who is most effective per minute, I'd say Jon Stewart. He doesn't get many minutes, so my answer is Colbert, given his exposure, good-natured humor and appeal. MSNBC obviously has the most exposure, 24 hours, but only for cable subscribers. SNL has had the longest influence -- over 50 years, but as they should, they make fun of all politicians, based on their flaws and idiosyncrasies. Right-wing Republicans are low hanging fruit. Their priority is making laughs, not points. Kimmel and Myers make it a point to make a point. South Park has the most balls and a cartoon-limited audience. The Right likes to accuse CNN of being leftist, but they're managed by a conservative and do provide a microphone for both sides. Maher considers himself a liberal but has adopted a number of right-wing talking points. It's debatable whether he still does more good by drawing the right out, from inside their biased bubble.

thus, the order of most blame for the ethical and moral decay of the Republican Party, as i see it: FOX News Republican Voters Money corrupted election system Republican GOP, House & Senate Social networks and internet bubbles The Lyin' King Weak Democratic Party FOX poisoned the sensibilities of Republican voters, politicians and judges. Those judges allowed money to corrupt elections and elect corrupt congresspeople. Internet bubbles accelerated the dumbing-down. The Lyin' King thrived. But if it wasn't him, it would be some other damaged extremist because the Dems play it too safe & cozy with donors to nominate their own change-agent. They won't take on the corrupted system they successfully navigated to secure their own seats in office.

the Republican Party decay over 30 years, as i remember it: Blacks, Hispanics, Gays, and women were making strides in society. Rush Limbaugh gave white male listeners a bold, racist rant to listen to during their daily traffic grind to work. FOX News took those divisive sound BITES and added 24 hour video -- in a bright, colorful studio with handsome, articulate men in suits and news-model women in short skirts to ogle while their fears were manipulated to keep them tuning in and buying from corporate sponsors. The G.W.Bush campaign leveraged Republican officials in Florida and conservative judges on the Supreme Court to stop the recount of election 2000 (I recall a continued WP recount indicated Gore won). The Gore campaign and DNC gracefully conceded without further investigation. It was the beginning of the Dems ongoing, "when they go low, we go high" approach. Despite the 9/11 terrorist being Saudi Arabians, Dems did not have the courage to oppose Bush's Afghan War. And despite outed lies of "weapons of mass destruction" they went along with his "shock & awe" Iraq War. It led to W's re-election. Americans were so hungry for change and integrity that they elected a Black man named Barrack Hussein Obama for 2 terms. But Obama had the White-Right seething, despite him presiding moderately. Bernie Sanders momentum as a change-candidate, was handicapped by the DNC in favor of Washington insider, Hillary Clinton. (4 years later, Bernie would again "feel the Bern" when Dem leaders circled the wagon around a faltering Joe Biden to prevent Sanders from locking up the Primary). Before Obama left office he let the Republican leader block his Supreme Court nominee, and kept quiet about Russian election interference, assuming Hillary had the election in the bag. A bag loaded with her opponent's scandals -- which were not fully exploited (see 4. "going high"). Despite GOP Senators showing signs they might turn on the scandalous, would-be Lyin' King, Dems passed early on impeachment talk, with leader Pelosi declaring it was "off the table" when they took back Congress. So began the Dems "let him fall on his own sword" campaign. On CNN her response to the Dems low approval rating, Pelosi replied, "at least our approval is higher than the Republicans." The "just be better than them" strategy is still alive today. Republican Senators learned that their voters would, indeed, stick with their Prez-a-King even if he "shot someone on 5th avenue" so they also stuck with him through 2 impeachments, an insurrection, and about a hundred other scandals that would have doomed any Dem politician (see Al Franken). By the time Obama's Dept of Justice realized the Lyin' King wouldn't fall on his own sword his criminal prosecution and conviction was too late. Despite serious election irregularities, no Democrat in office dares speak of 2024 "election rigging."

WHY DO REPUBLICANS WORK SO HARD TO REPRESS VOTING? https://www.facebook.com/share/p/1E67f9VwGo/

originally, the first Republican Party -- the Party of Lincoln -- was progressive, but their positions changed. Only a few decades ago, the Party still stood for something Americans could identify with -- fiscal conservatism, traditional family and Christian values, law & order, and service to country while still preserving individual freedoms. Today's Republican Party has made a mockery of all those things. my father voted for Nixon, so as a kid, I was on board with that. One of my earliest and clearest political memories was his Watergate scandal -- you know, when Republican voters and Congress still cared about maintaining an ethical posture. Nixon was forced to step down by his own Party. who's to blame for their new look? I'll tell you how i'd rank the culprits. I'm interested in your rankings...

A dictator needs a military loyal to him, not to a country or Constitution. I guess i was naive to laugh when Americans on the right said they needed guns to protect themselves from government. click the FB link to share: https://www.facebook.com/share/p/19xgDrzBjJ/ https://www.facebook.com/share/p/1FHQBbUTe2/

The "ear shot" might be the 11th option because it did make enough noise to help Kamala's opponent. And you might say Biden would be hindrance #12. Though he didn't leave Kamala with much time for damage control, other countries do, successfully, run short elections. And though The Lyin' King had "huge" donors, it's not like Kamala didn't have more than enough of our money to work with. Many of the 10 factors could have turned the election by themselves. Some worked together to form a perfect storm. The combo of his LIES, and her NOT AGGRESSIVELY confronting them was the game changer. For example, when he'd blame her and Biden for inflation, instead of saying inflation was the byproduct of corporate greed after his bungling of the pandemic, she avoided the issue. That made her look guilty and slippery. in order of importance, this is how i'd prioritize her reasons for losing: her opponent cheated. Possibly with the help of Musk. too vague and un-aggressive campaign considering that her opponent had to be the most flawed and corrupt candidate in history. Musk, JFK JR., Rogen cemented her opponent's image as the "change" candidate. Even if change might take the form of demolition. too little, middle, same. Doing too little and playing the middle regarding issues like Gaza and income inequality. She gave the public smiles and optimism without giving us a reason to believe she's not just delivering the same old political rhetoric. - 10. Though bias was a factor, i just can't believe America won't elect a woman. And Obama did prove a person of color was electable. I also believe that the economy and immigration struck chords with some people, as usual, who are 😴🤪🤑🤬. And anti-liberal alarms played a part as they always do, but "woke" is nothing new, and no reason for independents to vote for a lunatic.

my attempt to define who i am and we are, spiritually, can be read in my blog entry.

Reading between the Epstein card lines... i didn't get why a bawdy birthday card to J Epstein garnering headlines and a billion dollar lawsuit. I considered it might be staged by the WSJ and Prez to distract the press and re-unify his base. But after a week, the truth clicked when i finally heard the 4 or 5 middle lines of the card that mainstream media had omitted in their reporting. the complete contents of the card's message, though not legally incriminating, are embarrassing and damning why was the mainstream news story half-baked? Because the bully tactics worked. News outlets didn't want to risk being next on the Prez's legal or personal hit list! it doesn't matter that the Prez has no chance of winning his WSJ lawsuit. ABC, CBS, law firms and universities already settled nuisance lawsuits as the cost of doing business with the White House. This WSJ lawsuit goal was to swiftly silence other media outlets. so add that to the BULLY BULL💩: attacking the press for asking hardball questions coining derogatory schoolyard nicknames for opponents, competitors, etc.. supporting violence against protestors and calling in the military suing and/or threatening networks, newspapers, universities, etc.. but why do you think the Wall Street Journal took the risk of exposing the Prez? (especially, given it's connection to News Corp/Rupert Murdoch/Fox News)

This site feature is not available yet.

How to participate in our free services? Register as a Newbl (newBluePlanet) member in 1 minute. No personal data required. Once your email is validated you become a Newbl Newbie with limited privileges. After you submit your first comment/post in any forum (but NOT live CHAT) you'll be upgraded to a Newbl CITIZEN. (Tip: Simply post a couple of lines to introduce yourself) How to participate in the Liberal Hearts Club? A Newbl CITIZEN must add their club profile. Follow the single or friend links to the right sub-category. ADD your profile. After 24 hours, you can view other profiles and Private Message someone you want to communicate with. *there's a place here for being silly and fun too. And conservative -- as long as you're serious about honest communication.