Delicious
Digg
StumbleUpon
Newsvine
Facebook
Google
Yahoo
TechnoratiThe American Dream is alive and the nation can be better than it has been during the last eight years of President George Bush, Barack Obama said as he accepted the Democratic Party's presidential nomination.
![[People wave flags and posters of Democratic presidential nominee Barack Obama on day four of the Democratic National Convention (DNC) at Invesco Field at Mile High in Denver, Colorado. Obama told Americans their "dreams can be one" if they unite in a stirring new crusade for change, in a riotous finale to the historic Democratic National Convention. (AFP/Getty Images/Mark Wilson)]](http://www.commondreams.org/files/article_images/obamalove.jpg "obamalove.jpg")
Delivering the most important speech of his life to more than 80,000 people at
an open-air stadium in Denver, Colorado, Mr Obama left no doubt America was
ready for change and said it was time for voters to stand up and say: "Eight
is enough!"
"I get it," he said. "I realise that I am not the likeliest candidates for this office. I don't fit the typical pedigree, and I haven't spent my career in the halls of Washington.
"But I stand before you tonight because all across America something is stirring. What the nay-sayers don't understand is that this election has never been about me. It's about you."
Mr Obama confronted every criticism made by Mr McCain and the Republicans of his campaign and the Democrats head-on, from his ego and rock star status to his lack of foreign policy experience and his tax policies.
"If John McCain wants to have a debate about who has the temperament, and judgment, to serve as the next commander-in-chief, that's a debate I'm ready to have," Mr Obama declared, referring to his rival's notorious temper and criticism of his own lack of experience.
"America, we are better than these last eight years," he said. "We are a better country than this."
Mr Obama, who made history on Wednesday as the first African American US presidential nominee of a major party, said: "This moment - this election - is our chance to keep, in the 21st century, the American promise alive."
The 47-year-old Illinois senator said his Republican rival John McCain, a former Vietnam prisoner of war, had "voted with George Bush 90 per cent of the time".
"I don't know about you, but I'm not ready to take a 10 per cent chance on change," he said.
Mr Obama, whose keynote address at the party's 2004 convention shot him to fame, gave his 44-minute acceptance speech last night 45 years to the day after Martin Luther King Jr inspired the world with his "I Have a Dream" speech.
"America, we cannot turn back," he said.
The final day of the convention was moved outside to the Invesco Field stadium in a bid to show his candidacy extends beyond the politicians who have dominated the convention so far.
Ten supporters, including some who donated only $5 (£2.72), were invited to join Mr Obama backstage beforehand and watched his speech from the front row.
At the end of a convention dominated by the issue of unity between Mr Obama and his former rival Hillary Clinton, the Democrat received the loudest applause when he embraced the idea of coming together.
"The times are too serious, the stakes are too high for this same partisan playbook," he said.
"The men and women who serve in our battlefields may be Democrats and Republicans and Independents, but they have fought together and bled together and some died together under the same proud flag.
"They have not served a Red America or a Blue America - they have served the United States of America."
Mr Obama said America needed to restore its "sense of higher purpose" and "the promise of a democracy where we can find the strength and grace to bridge divides and unite in common effort."
The Democrat also confronted the McCain campaign's accusations over his ego and celebrity status.
He said his grandmother Sarah in Kenya had worked hard so that he could have a better life and "poured everything she had into me".
"I don't know what kind of lives John McCain thinks that celebrities lead, but this has been mine," he said.
Striving to dismiss criticisms that his lofty, inspirational campaign consisted of empty rhetoric, he set out "exactly what change would mean if I am president".
He pledged to cut taxes for 95 per cent of all working families, end US dependence on oil from the Middle East within 10 years and create jobs for Americans.
America's troubled economy and its national security were his central focus.
He said he had "made clear we must take out Osama bin Laden and his lieutenants if we have them in our sights" and added: "John McCain likes to say that he'll follow bin Laden to the Gates of Hell - but he won't even go to the cave where he lives."
Mr Obama went on: "As commander-in-chief I will never hesitate to defend this nation, but I will only send our troops into harm's way with a clear mission and a sacred commitment to give them the equipment they need in battle and the care and benefits they deserve when they come home."
He offered details of his plans for energy and education, health and the climate crisis and pre-empted criticism he was a liberal who believed in "spend, spend, spend".
"I've laid out how I'll pay for every dime - by closing corporate loopholes and tax havens that don't help America grow," he said.
Mr Obama added that America's failure to respond to its challenges were "a direct result of a broken politics in Washington and the failed policies of George W Bush".
It was time for Republicans to "own their failure", he said.
"It's time for us to change America. And that's why I'm running for President of the United States."
Fireworks erupted over the stadium as Mr Obama was joined by his wife Michelle and daughters Malia, 10, and Sasha, seven, at the end of his speech.
A bid to get most of those packed into the stadium to form the world's largest phone bank - text-messaging thousands more to boost voter registration for November's general election - also underscored how the Obama campaign has harnessed modern technology to garner support in what polls indicate will be a close race between Mr Obama and Mr McCain for a place in history as the 44th president of the United States.
At the end of a convention dominated by the issue of unity between Mr Obama and his former rival Hillary Clinton, the Democrat received the loudest applause when he embraced that theme.
"One of the things that we have to change in our politics is the idea that people cannot disagree without challenging each other's character and patriotism," he said.
"The times are too serious, the stakes are too high for this same partisan playbook.
"So let us agree that patriotism has no party. I love this country, and so do you, and so does John McCain.
"The men and women who serve in our battlefields may be Democrats and Republicans and Independents, but they have fought together and bled together and some died together under the same proud flag.
"They have not served a Red America or a Blue America - they have served the United States of America."
Mr Obama said America needed to restore its "sense of higher purpose".
"This too is part of America's promise," he said.
"The promise of a democracy where we can find the strength and grace to bridge divides and unite in common effort."
He explained: "We may not agree on abortion, but surely we can agree on reducing the number of unwanted pregnancies in this country.
"The reality of gun ownership may be different for hunters in rural Ohio than for those plagued by gang-violence in Cleveland, but don't tell me we can't uphold the Second Amendment while keeping AK-47s out of the hands of criminals.
"I know there are differences on same-sex marriage, but surely we can agree that our gay and lesbian brothers and sisters deserve to visit the person they love in the hospital and to live lives free of discrimination.
"Passions fly on immigration, but I don't know anyone who benefits when a mother is separated from her infant child or an employer undercuts American wages by hiring illegal workers."
He said some critics dismissed such suggestions as "happy talk", but he said that when rivals did not have any fresh ideas, they "use stale tactics to scare the voters".
"If you don't have a record to run on, then you paint your opponent as someone people should run from," he said.
"You make a big election about small things."
Mr Obama used his speech to confront every criticism made by Mr McCain and the Republicans of his campaign and the Democrats.
"If John McCain wants to have a debate about who has the temperament, and judgment, to serve as the next commander-in-chief, that's a debate I'm ready to have," Mr Obama said, referring to his rival's notorious temper and criticism of his own lack of experience.
The Democrat also confronted the McCain campaign's accusations over his ego and celebrity status.
He said his grandmother Sarah in Kenya had worked hard so that he could have a better life and "poured everything she had into me".
"I don't know what kind of lives John McCain thinks that celebrities lead, but this has been mine," he said.
"These are my heroes. Theirs are the stories that shaped me. And it is on their behalf that I intend to win this election and keep our promise alive as President of the United States."
He also described his former rival Hillary Clinton as "a champion for working Americans and an inspiration to my daughters and to yours".
He even echoed Mrs Clinton's passionate speech on Tuesday night when he said: "I stand before you tonight because all across America something is stirring. What the nay-sayers don't understand is that this election has never been about me. It's about you."
Striving to dismiss criticisms that his lofty, inspirational campaign consisted of empty rhetoric, he set out "exactly what change would mean if I am president".
America's troubled economy and its national security were his central focus, with pledges to cut taxes for 95 per cent of all working families, end US dependence on oil from the Middle East within 10 years and create jobs for Americans.
"We are the party of Roosevelt. We are the party of Kennedy. So don't tell me that Democrats won't defend this country. Don't tell me that Democrats won't keep us safe.
"As commander-in-chief I will never hesitate to defend this nation, but I will only send our troops into harm's way with a clear mission and a sacred commitment to give them the equipment they need in battle and the care and benefits they deserve when they come home."
He also detailed his plans on energy and education, health and the climate crisis.
Mr Obama then pre-empted criticism he was a liberal who believed in "spend, spend, spend".
"I've laid out how I'll pay for every dime - by closing corporate loopholes and tax havens that don't help America grow," he said.
Mr Obama added that America's failure to respond to its challenges were "a direct result of a broken politics in Washington and the failed policies of George W Bush".
It was time for Republicans to "own their failure", he said.
"It's time for us to change America. And that's why I'm running for President of the United States."
168 Comments so far
Show AllAll this griping here as usual with your flights into the never-land of Peter Pan and all here who would like to be children consumers in this liberal so-called progressive blog. The dream -,merchants who want nothing but purity of thought and an end to the political meanderings of this so-called democracy.
The reality of this world pits the American Dream now become the the western worlds dream and the world's nightmare represented by both political parties and supported by all of your 401ks. Lets stop the nonsense out there. There is only one choice, to take a chance on a little change represented by a black man who will try within his limited power to change the way business is done and someone who will continue business as usual! Obama can only do only so much, Nader or anyone else can do nothing!
This a a one party system if you want more choice try changing it to a parliamentary system. Good luck! That will happen after we are under thirty feet of water. In this system and the way it is in reality not in Disney Land you have a single possibility of a little change rather than no change at all!
Wake up children!
.
http://www.votenader.org/media/2008/08/29/minnealpolisrally/
Fresh from a 4000-person super rally in Denver, the Nader/Gonzalez Campaign team has hit the ground in Minneapolis and will be out in full force over the weekend to focus attention on the need for opening up the Presidential Debates for third party and independent candidates, working towards the crescendo: a star-studded open the debates super-rally on Thursday.
Ralph Nader, Matt Gonzalez, Jesse Ventura, Cindy Sheehan, Justin Jeffre, Nellie McKay, and other surprise guests to be named soon to be announced will all appear at the Nader/Gonzalez "Open the Debates" Super Rally September 4 at 7.30 p.m. at the Orchestra Hall in Minneapolis.
The Nader/Gonzalez independent presidential candidacy will be on the ballot in 45 states, is polling at 5-6 percent nationally, and a new Time/CNN poll shows Ralph Nader polling 8 percent in New Mexico, 7 percent in Colorado, 7 percent in Pennsylvania, and 6 percent in Nevada -- all key battleground states.
.
Jeeeez. Im dumbfounded. All this energy on electing a bunch of thugs to office. There is no way in hell Nader or Mckinney is gonna be elected to office. The Corporate media has already decided we need to artificially choose between one of their two candidates. The real fight is clearly to attack 'corporate media' and ensure its control over our society is neutralized. Wasting our time arguing over this non-sensical election is completely counter-productive.
As for this gem:
"In more genuine "democracies" - France, India, Pakistan, Korea; "
When the fuck did Pakistan become a genuine democracy ? The Army controls everything. The last election was a sham like all the others before them. Musharraf was getting out of hand and this elaborate scheme to get rid of him and give the Pakistani people a false sense of empowerment was the only reason the 'elections' were carried out ... with our permission.
Come on guys. It was the best speech that money could buy. Most of it lacked specifics about implementation, but skillfully outlined a general direction that seemed like relief to a lot of people. There was little indication of how we got where we are, or that some confrontation might be needed to bring about change. Confrontation is sooo divisive and we are one big happy family, right?
As others have mentioned, the comments on the Afghan cave and on Iran were downright juvenile, pandering, dangerous and out of touch with reality. Obama is too well-informed to believe what he said. I don't remember him saying anything about human rights and the Constitution here in the US. He snubbed Jimmy Carter.
And yet many people I know were walking on air as a result of the speech. Some have had traumatic experiences with life and with racism, including two white women who had relationships with African American men forcibly ended years ago. They tell me that they never thought they would live to see a Black man running for president. So many think that the redeemer has arrived. One told me she had a hard time getting over Hillary (hey I didn't say it) but the speech turned her to Obama.
They are in the throes of love and think I am too negative - so I gently explain what I think. They are ready to hear criticisms of McCain, but not of Obama. Some say that Obama is doing what he needs to do to get elected. Or if they listen, then they ask what a voter should do. I know a lot of people here like Nannie have one word answers (Nader, Greens), but how would you actually go about convincing my neighbors and relatives to vote now or to put in the time to make voting next time more of a choice? These are kind, generous people who care about war, the poor, the earth etc etc, so please don't insult them.
In my opinion it is fairly hopeless since we do not have a viable third party and most people deal with the immediate (and always have).
So where can we run independent candidates? Find the most lazy and venial locals and run some local activist against them.
Joe
No other choice really....Barak Obama Inc, or the olde tyme magic of President Alzhiemers and his pretty young assistant....watch as he pulls his own ass out of a hat!
"The only means of strengthening one's intellect is to make up one's mind about nothing, to let the mind be a thoroughfare for all thoughts." - John Keats
"By tapping the anti-abortion and pro-gun Alaska governor just ahead of his convention, which is set to start here Monday, McCain hasn’t just won approval from a skeptical Republican base — he’s ignited a wave of elation and emotion that has led some grass-roots activists to weep with joy."
http://news.yahoo.com/s/politico/20080831/pl_politico/13016
It's a fundamentalist's wet dream come true.
Yes, mujeriego, there is no other choice than Obama unless we want to see another dozen or so nails in our coffin. I think the neocons have been setting the table for this. Unless we stop them, dinner will be served.
It sux, but we all know it's true.
It's for damn sure that he can't do any worse.
Bring America Back !!!!
**KEY WORD IS "VOWS" Words and speeches are great and
do Inspire==but so far broken promises and sheer stupidity
are the hallmarks of Senator Obama's Campaign !
***Reform was promised against the "failed policies" of Bush, yet Sen Obama votes and caves in to Big Telecons
votes FOR the FISA law retro forgiving wiretaping crimes in violation of the US Fourth Amendment ! The "VOW" he took was to ..."protect and defend the Constitution of the USA against all enemies, foreign and domestic"..how does his FISA vote fit into that VOW ?? And, he wishes to take the
exact VOW again in January 2009!
***CHANGE was promised, yet Obama picks Joe Biden--a same
old good ol Boy who has earned his white hair==and the
Mc Cain Group goes with Sarah Palin, the real changer
in the equation-- when Kathleen Sebelius should've been Obama's VP of Change !
***Obama pledges no oil drilling off the coast of Florida, then one week later announces that, Gee, maybe some drilling in the Atlantic is Okay==after getting blasted by McCain's energy policy rhetoric.
***Mc Cain's campaign plays his 'Prisoner of War' card, then
Obama openly on TV rebukes, negates, and criticizes 4 Star General Wesley Clark for merely stating that being a POW is not a real qualification to become President ! Obama's Staff clearly has him in the Reverend Wright apologetics mode==He would apologize for a ham sandwich if he could !
Obama seriously needs to publicly admit this mistake to General Wesley Clark !!! Just plain stupid !! Incredible.
****Obama promises a Man=Hunt for Osama bin Laden even unto the caves he dwells in ! Does anybody really believe in their hearts that a cave dwelling Boogie Man, and 19 airline school flunkouts could have pulled off the absolute technical genius which was and is the Spectre of 9/11 ??
****Obama's first speech when becoming Our presumptive nominee was at the altar of AIPAC, the Zionist radical right=wing organization which controls US Policy in the Middle East,and which labels any opponent as Anti-Semite!
King George just can't say NO to AIPAC either, so just
where is the "CHANGE" in that, when Obama mouths words like diplomacy, and negotiation instead of War ???
Americans are not dumb!! That's why the Neocon War-Monger currently in the White House has a 10 percent approval ! That's why Pres Clinton had a 70 percent approval rating even all during his Impeachment !! WE'RE NOT STUPID !
Now that we all enjoyed the Democratic rock concert in Denver, it is time for Obama to radically change his campaign Staff, for they undoubtedly are in grave danger of blowing another sure-thing Election! We just have got to have positive ACTIONS not words or EMPTY VOWS to win this election !!!
The Neocons are now bringing the battle, and Obama cannot wait until after the Inaugural Ball to deliver his VOWS, words and promises==because if he does we are going to see John and Sarah dancing instead of Barak and Jill !!!
AS KUCINICH SCREAMED AT THE CONVENTION: "WAKE UP AMERICA"
"Technical genuis"???? Are u serios?? Thats the problem with the uS--they think that one perso can protect them--an open society has risks. IO have a sis in NYC--and it was HORRIBLE! But no one is goi gto attack the US from an identifiable state--like, with a nuke, or come marching up into NY Harbor. Thes guys got us with hate, box cutters, and a couple mos of flight training. We have the pmost powerful military (although , not much else these days)in the world--what good did it do us? They are defeating a war that never shouldve hapapaend in Iraq with hate, IEDs and guerilla warfazare. How hard would you fight to not be occupied? I agree with a lot of your premise. But what we ned to do is STOP trying to "morally lead the rest of the world"--I dont really belive other countries are "waiting for US leadership". We need to get off of oil, but we can tax the windfall profitws to help people who drive for a living, need to buy hybrids , insulate houses, etc. One thing to do right now is lower the speed limit to 55 MPH.Ration gasoline, meat (which hogs resources), and other goods. Some people simply cannot afford to make the changes, we wil have to susidie it--we sure as hell do with the oil cos. , the war inc., agri-business. etc,Why cant Obama come out with some o f ths stuff? The MPH would change things in 2 days.People nmight then have faith and be willing to sacrifice instead of shop
A better future for America will be possible ONLY when
the total truth about the events of 911 is provided to American citizens. Obama will NOT make any effort to do that. Zelikow, Addington, Bush and Cheney know that, as do the powers at AIPAC, AEI, the Heritage Foundation and JINSA, just to name a few.
Digression:
I feel so sorry for you folks who get upset because you have to click one more time to access the comments. Boo hoo.
Burying the comments is no big deal compared to the content censorship.
But grown-ups occasionally see past seemingly minor changes and consider the "message", or meaning, behind such changes.
When-- if-- you become a grown-up hamster, you'll find out what I'm talking about.
In the meantime, enjoy what's left of the summer! Or middle school, if you're back already. High school is much more of a challenge, you know.
I made no comment on censorship by CD.
Little Brother, your reply makes you look foolish.
lil bro is trying to tell ya in his oh-so snarky way that this is censorship lite. why CD would filter (to a degree) the participatory/interactive part of net culture is beyond me.
Quite right-- but in all fairness, it was actually counter-snarky.
The snide "boo hoo" accompanying the small-minded conclusion that the objection to hiding the comments was simply a matter of being irritated at having to do an extra click warranted it, IMO.
And now I'll have to live with the curse of being thought foolish by hamster. It won't be easy, but I'll just have to pick myself up off the ground and take it day by day.
Come on guys, just agree to disagree and forget this stuff. We all get to far in sometimes. Have a good discussion and let it go.
And Obama voted for the FISA changes. Any chance we could get back on topic?
r u the new moderator here, kdelph? just funnin' ya...i'm a truthdig exile and it's good to see u here
with the new set-up, it's really neat to be establishing threads within threads. but the "hiding" aspect of the new set-up has caused CD to lose some of it's loose free-wheeling charm.
The Democratic convention looked like a composite of America. All ethnic groups were present and represented. The soon to be President Obama looked splendid and gave the best speech of his life. Eighty thousand plus people says it all. I do not want to hear what the "talking heads and the polls" have to say because "a picture is worth a thousand words". The old adage of "lies, damn lies, and statistics" immediately comes to mind when the media tries to convince you, me, and the majority of the american people that this is going to be a tight/close race and that the two candidates are running neck and neck. Until the media can show me and the american people john mccain in a setting with eighty thousand people, until mccain can go abroad a draw a crowd of a quarter million people then I refuse to believe that the race is close. mccain is having trouble filling a high school gym. I hope the American people wake up and demand fair treatment for our candidates because all of the camera shots at the democratic convention showed it all; the good, the bad, and the ugly. I notice at ALL mccain apearances the camera angles are focused for the most attractive shots and with mccain there are not many attractive angles. Palin will help 100% in the beauty aspect. Also when the camera focuses on mccain gatherings there are only "tight shots" of the candidate and the crowd with no panning of the camera because the crowds are small by comparison to Obama.
bottomrail August 30th, 2008 10:49 am
"Eighty thousand plus people says it all."
So you think that the herd instinct trumps all then? That because Obama drew a crowd of eighty thousand for his nomination for one half of the duopoly that runs this country that all of the rest of us should just automatically fall in line behind them regardless of his stands on the issues? Sheep will walk over a steep cliff if the leader does it first, I'm not a sheep and many others here aren't either. We'll view the dead mangled bodies at the bottom, shake our heads, turn around and go the other way.
Lobo Gris
No, not all Americans are stupid; I have read some comments from aware people here. I think though, that the following interview sums it up:
Press TV interviewed the former Alaska senator, Mike Gravel :
http://www.presstv.ir/detail.aspx?id=67913§ionid=3510302
"… what we hear …what we see now is politics as usual in the United States…all the hoopla...and it is very sad because you can get away with this so long. We are raising expectations so high with the hope of change and when change is not realized, and it will not be, it just will not be. Then, of course, comes the alternative which is going to be a very cynical population in this country.
…..right now we are the dangerous country in the world. We truly are and I do not know of any way to change that other than to empower the people to be able to become lawmakers. You'll never see the representative government correct itself from the inside. It is going to come from the outside.
…..In fact, all you have got to do is watch the fact that every time we talk about war in Iraq, Afghanistan or threats to Iran you watch the price of gas go up at the pump and look who is punished the average American citizen who can not put two and two together as to what is going on in this regard. "
To me what is such a shame is that so many people in America and especially all around the world have to suffer because some selfish dumb asses cannot wake up from their self delusion.
Nothing is going to change for the man from Kenya.
As long as AMDOCS, COMVERSE INFOSYS are recording every phone and E mail these politicians with a passed are controlled. Notice how every politician from what ever country visites the USA all of a sudden change?
High rhetoric on a grand scale paid for by AT&T, that's Obama. United Health Care's premiums going up twenty percent this year, that's reality. Rhetoric does not change reality.
So many people expressed their concerns that they have a problem with Obama's deceptions and dissembling, and yet said they would vote for him. If the voter does not have any principles about selecting a leader for the country, why shoud the politician have any principles about lying to the voters? Vote for a liar and you'll be a slave of the liar. Make your vote meaningless and make yourself a slave by voting Obama.
quark August 30th, 2008 1:30 am
Granted, he's (Obama) not immune to the pressures inherent in our rotten political system, but the general philosophical outlook that he has *lived* shows that he is a different animal than the corporate puppets employed by the Republicans.
If Obama is such a different animal howcome he voted for the new FISA bill that gives immunity to the telecoms that spied on us, a clear violation of the 4th amendment to the Constitution? Howcome he wants to expand the military? Howcome he wants to expand the war in Afghanistan? Howcome he now says that withdrawing from Iraq depends on the commanders in the field as opposed to the firm withdrawal schedule he proposed as a primary candidate, a position that is now the same as Bush and McCain?
Please feel free to continue to delude yourself about Obama but I don't think that your attempts to delude others is working.
Lobo Gris
I agree with quark.
Hillary, Kucinich, Al Gore... John Edwards, women of character such as Claire McCaskill of Missouri, Susan Eisenhower, granddaughter of the former five-star general and two-term Republican president and Kathleen Sibelius, governor of Kansas. First Mexican Governor Bill Richardson and statesmen such as Bill Clinton, Jimmy Carter, and Ted Kennedy.
These are the names of some of the people supporting Obama.
And I ask, as a citizen, do you think your view of politics is better than these people? Do you think these people are all just stupid, blind, and in Obama-mania?
Do you think Ted Kennedy got out of his death bed to support Obama, just because he's looking for another term, or because he like the way Obama makes lofty speeches?
If you answer yes than you have problems. The fact of the matter is these are really smart people who know politics, and they're all uniting behind Obama because they believe in him.
If you can't take their word for it? Whose can you?
My brain! All of these people now have a stake in this and are politicians.Where are Obama's old, true friedns that are not paid for? Back at Rev,. Wright's church?Kathleen Sibelius is mamblum pablum. Claire McCaskill (who shouldve known Obama from the Senate) decided top "sign on" to Obama's campaign when, as she put it, her young daughter showed her his wwebsite, and "called her everything , including a slug" if she did not support Obama. She is one of those damn Blue Dogs and i'm sure she and Rockefeller hasd a great time at the AT&T party at the Convention
hocus...that was really a sad posting. others here have answered u well. u gotta get to the point in your life where u trust your own judgment. sure, u can take other's pov in to consideration, but u can't slavishly follow them. these people that u list are part of an outdated political structure...a duopoly. and the structure of our constitution makes it very hard to change this system. it's gonna take a lotta work to bring about a system that allows the will of the people to be expressed effectively thru democratic institutions and proccesses...but that's our task.
Your frames are typical of today’s crooked thinking:
--And I ask, as a citizen, do you think your view of politics is better than these people?
That is the whole point of democracy is that each voters view has the same value... NO VIEW IS BETTER. I ask you, what is wrong with you people, who cannot see that you are being led like sheep to accept whatever slaughter the AIPAC or MIC will get you to happily embrace through their propaganda that you love to swallow from the MSM? Thinking, acting and organizing for yourselves is too difficult. Those people in Thailand have got more balls!
--Do you think these people are all just stupid, blind, and in Obama-mania?
Of course they are not stupid, they are mostly millionaires maintained by and maintaining the status quo! The stupid ones are you who think you are, want to be, or can be the same yourself, while at the same time you know the system is rotten. That is self delusion.
--Do you think Ted Kennedy got out of his death bed to support Obama, just because he's looking for another term, or because he like the way Obama makes lofty speeches?
Just like the rest, his life depends on maintaining the status quo!
--If you can't take their word for it? Whose can you?
Now that is the first reasonable question you have asked, and what so few in America are asking!
hocus_pocus21 August 30th, 2008 2:50 am
"And I ask, as a citizen, do you think your view of politics is better than these people?"
Yes, they are endorsing Obama
"Do you think these people are all just stupid, blind, and in Obama-mania? Do you think Ted Kennedy got out of his death bed to support Obama, just because he's looking for another term, or because he like the way Obama makes lofty speeches?
No I think that all but one of them are Democrats that are suffering from an outsized sense of loyalty to the party or mass delusion, take your pick.
"If you can't take their word for it? Whose can you?"
No one in Obama's case. His actions have spoken louder for him than any one person or group of people ever could.
Lobo Gris
Well stated, Lobo Gris!
There's another fallacious, or at least unreliable, component to this implicit "appeal to authority" argument.
One of the blindered Clydesdales of lesser-evilist Democratic Party/Obama supporters posting here (before the Comments Reformation) often pointed out, with characteristic rancorous exasperation and high dudgeon, that HOWARD ZINN advocates voting for Obama.
This appeal to authority has a facile double advantage: it both puts down the interlocutor as being arrogant or stoopit enough to presume that he or she is wiser than Howard Zinn, and simultaneously elevates the user to a one-up position, insofar as the user proves how wise and sensible he or she is by being in accord with such a justly respected thinker as Zinn.
This rhetorical attack founders because it rests on the assumption that the better part of wisdom or common-sense is to blindly align oneself with an authority rather than daring to believe that one's own individual wits, sensibilities, and conscience exist to make independent decisions and choices.
Sure, I respect Howard Zinn and Jimmy Carter. But, as you've succinctly noted, there are many factors in play that explain their positions. They make mistakes and bad decisions, too. And I'm fairly certain that they would reject the idea that citizens should play "follow the leader" and line up behind them willy-nilly.
One might feel compelled to consider these esteemed persons in evaluating one's position, but such thoughtful consideration is far from the knee-jerk, reflexive "gotcha" attack that really only says, "if people who are so much better than YOU enthusiastically support X, who the hell are YOU to do differently?"
Who the hell AM I? I ask myself this every day. Not a born follower, whatever else I may be.
Did any of the Naderites notice one connection points between Nader and Obama? Nader speaks to first year law students around the country every year (including Harvard Law where I once heard him, having snuck in) trying to convince them to go into a field of public law that benefits people rather than corporations.
Barack Obama is one of only five percent who heeded his call. He could have gone straight to a corporate law firm for a starting salary of $160,000 and made partner in a few years.
Instead, public service is what he chose. At the ground level, at that. Think about it.
Granted, he's not immune to the pressures inherent in our rotten political system, but the general philosophical outlook that he has *lived* shows that he is a different animal than the corporate puppets employed by the Republicans.
It's astonishing how bent people here are on assuming the most sinister machinations. This plays right into the hands of the Republicans: American elections tend to be won by the party who manages to keep most of potential voters likely to go for the other candidate home - or by funding the campaigns of 3rd party candidates who don't stand a chance but to take away voters from the opponent.
You underestimate how influential an effective leader can be.
By inspiring people. By stacking key positions with people who belong there instead of industry hacks intent on destroying the agencies they are heading. By changing the tax law. By expanding energy conservation efforts and making alternative energy a priority. By getting us out of Iraq.
Remember the Soviet Union? Many historian agree that its collapse was mainly a consequence of having been financially ruined in the arms race pushed by a relentless military industrial complex in the US. We're very close to that collapse now ourselves. I'm able to leave this sinking ship without much inconvenience - are you? If not work with what you got.
-=-=-=-=-=-=-
Let's elect Obama and support Progressive Democrats of America http://pdamerica.org to convince him that progressive policies make sense and resonate with people's ultimate desire for peace, sustainability, and responsible economics.
PD America spent all week censoring their chat rooms which showed thei ineffective meetings with the formerly honorable likes of Tom Hayden (of SDS--"Is protest really relevant in the age of Onama?" Geeezz!!!!!! I hope i die before I get THAT old!), Soloman (who was an Obama delegate) and kept bloging articles about HuffPo (the tent or whate ver), where you coudl get good food on a toothpick (while railing about Lobbyists) and Conyers, who, I like (he has good ide4as abou t health care)--but these California liberals (I never thought I would use that term-0-I used to admire these people so much!)claimed to have spent year "setting this up" and any questions by anyone unable to "donate" were NOT appreciated. There werew people from other ocuntries who occasionally wandered in--they couldnt believe it was being censored.I couldnt either. These people are far from the worst--but, Gawd, after awhile, if you're an avg. person out here--what is the diff?? I've "worked with what I get" for far tooklong. I worked my ass of for that soulless Kerry and what gopod di ti do. He quit before Tubbs JOnes even had a chancr to file the lawsuit on the state of Ohio. I watched her memorial today--I loved her. But they turned it into an "Obama raly"--shame! I wanted Kucinich, but, she was a die-hare Hillary supporter, until she stepped aside.When Kucinich got up at he Convention to "this ones for Stephanie", Obama had cut the opart of his speech thaty mentioned "imprisoning Bush et al" More shame. Try the "Why should I believe you" video on YouTube. The voter caging (which was done by paper in 2004) came to real lifein Denver--more shame. I'm afraid I'm just not goin to ber able to do it anymore
Strange thing to say regarding the MIC considering Obama wants to increase military spending. (So he says, of course...)
How is it that Nader, McKinney, et al are much more immune to the "pressures inherent in our rotten political system", running campaigns for high office based on transparency, consistency, integrity? Are you trying to argue that just being in politics makes a person more corrupt and stray from their ideals? If so, how do you explain the individuals I just mentioned?
Obama's nebulous claims about "getting us out of Iraq", about giving tax breaks to 95% (how big? how consistently? paid for how?), and much else have been examined with critical eyes already.
Are you also arguing that Obama is largely above the corporate-dominated political system? Seriously?
We need to always be critical, especially of the claims of major-party politicians, all of us.
This guy is Republican lite.
How far the Democrats have fallen, many in the party don't even ascribe to once traditional policies we badly need back in practice.
Barack Obama was for single payer before he came out against it.
Do you really think that the majority of this country are progressives? You can't ignore Republican's issues when running for president.
You should at least, be able to ignore GOP concerns in the DEM PRIMAARY! If he quoted REAGAN one more time UI wouldve projectile vomitted. So, hes gonna reach acrsos the aisle, and make opeace with Iran, but he scouldnt bering himself to reach out to supportesr of other candidates--how is THAT goin to work? If he is not afraid of Nader or McKinney--tell him to include thenm!
Actually, there are a number of indications that Americans do have "progressive" inclinations. That being the case, what is needed is a leader who recognizes and lights a spark to those inclinations. Obama is not that leader, of course. His obvious role is to sustain the corporate establishment just a bit longer. (Let's drag this out as long as we can...) The American Dream is real and yada yada...
BTW, I'm with wsws.org site. This "free speech zone" is pissing me off. I'm not exactly sure why those who take the time and effort to post commentary on the articles carry little weight compared with those who - we can't quite figure out why -(oh, that's right, they don't like the "tone") - object to discussion. (Rather...they object to discussion that is visible. Tucked away in the proper "zone" is fine.)
Arry - I was thinking the EXACT same thing as I went to open this thread, and lo and behold, the first post on the list was yours! Screw this free speech zone. And I am a monthly supporter of CD (but may not be for long). How did it ever become impolite to discuss politics in a democratic society?!?
I'm rolling my eyes because this is about the 30th accusation I've read of nefarious CD intent in the last couple weeks, keeping its woe-afflicted readers in a virtual cage. We are woe-afflicted, but not because of this.
Partly technical meta digression here. I have mixed feelings about the newly hidden comment system here. I absolutely hate having to click on "Show all" every time I open a new article or refresh the same article to get more comments - as I've written to CD already and will again if necessary, hiding needs to be an option built into each user's profile. There are also other poorly thought out and executed elements of the new display of comments (e.g. Collapsed views), and the update of the site has so far been amateurish - should have been tested well on a development server, then rolled out, without making the readership fumble along through all the missteps.
Do hidden comments amount to censorship? I think some readers have been taking the analogies too far. It's a perfectly valid design and usability consideration to make the display of unknowably long text blocks optional. It speeds up the initial view of the page to hide comments at first, and speed is an important consideration in all web development. There is also the fact that CD might reasonably want to highlight the "meat" of the page, the contributed article, upon which the page is built. Comments are built on the foundation of the article. Many readers on the internet consider reader-contributed commentary to be poorly written, overly temperamental, or fluffy. I think that CD has higher-quality reader commentary than average, but it's certainly not all worthwhile, and for some articles the reader commentary is a huge amount of crap.
There's also the point that many news sites and blogs, probably the rule rather than the exception now, make display of comments optional, and is thus more of a standard. This may be a less compelling argument for many readers here, and it is for me also, given what has become standard in the US media in general. But this goes beyond the US media.
Remember the bad old days of CD when readers couldn't comment at all? That situation existed for several years. Does that mean CD management were fascists back then, then saw the light, but have now semi-reverted to their old ways? I think there are more likely explanations that that, and I've given a few here.
But, yohocoma, you are ignoring the stated reason for the changes. Thousands of readers didn't like the "tone". That's not a technical point.
I already acknowledged that CD may have a point other than technical - "the tone and level of discourse by a few" was the key phrase in CD's email. What does that mean? Well, the sexist slurs on the Sarah Palin threads may be an example. CD commentary is often cogent and enlightening, sometimes brilliant, often better than the articles themselves. But some of it is hate-filled crap, and I don't mean the kind of "good progressive hate" of our political and social circumstances.
CD could be outright censoring much more aggressively than it does. But I think they're pretty liberal in their comment policy, at least up until the present. Using a simple scripting device to hide and unhide public commentary, at the reader's will, is not "ghettoizing" or "disappearing" our commentary, in my opinion. Have you stopped to consider that CD management may consider this to be a decent compromise between no-holds-barred and case-by-case censorship?
Speaklign of censorship, the PDA did it al weekend! Theyre going to become neo-liberal fascists if they dont watch it
Well, I guess wsws and others have addressed my confusion. It's the American way. Isolate, then get back to "serious" business.
Chris Horton at 12:36 PM -- What is this "our leader Dennis Kucinich", and "...the commander that history has thrown up for us, Barack Obama."
Get a grip. Kucinich isn't my leader (so I'm not sure who the "our" is) and since when is an elected president "commander" of United States citizens?
Sorry. I'm forgetting about the new feature of replying to individual posts.
"Obama Vows to Deliver a Better Future For America"
That's absolutely impossible for ANY of the people running for president. The future consists of a declining resource base, accelerating atmospheric CO2, failing financial institutions, continued hollowing out of the manufacturing base, increasing pollution, increasing incidences of cancer, increasing birth defects, increasing decay of essential infrastructure, decreasing food supply consisting of increasingly tainted food products, increasing poverty, increasing ignorance, increasing state-sponsored violence, and this list isn't yet complete. While some of these trends might be stopped and even reversed, there is no way getting around the ecological fact that we are way past Overshoot, and will soon, if we haven't already, start entering an ecological Bottleneck that only a small fraction of the 6.5 billion humans on the planet will fit through. And as many here noted, Obama said NOTHING about ANY of the above listed things.
This isn't to say don't vote. Vote, but understand the context wherein your vote takes place. The future is ugly and will get uglier. I don't like it, but I refuse to lie to myself or to the good people here on this board.
For alternative news and analysis and for coverage of other places in the world besides USA, if you read Spanish, go to:
www.rebelion.org
or www.telesurtv.net
Or go to aljazeera.
Helps keep one's sanity and connection to the world.
Why can't people take seriously Gore Vidal's assertion that we're not good at adventurism, occupations, espionage and hard sell of our own ways to very different cultures that we don't know enough about?
Why do people ignore those analysts who say we're only effective when we set good example at home?
Why do we think we know best for other countries? And what would happen if we simply drew in our horns? I think we're much more of a disaster when we're running power plays out in the world than when we concentrate on the huge issues at home-- which we simply don't do enough.
Score another one for the Oligarchy. The divided progressives are conquered once again. Labour is already divided and conquered. who's next? who remains? you lose (lost?).
Vote against the $$$ folks. Follow the $$$, the Oligarchy wants BHO not JMcC cuz he's too unstable and liable to over-shoot the plan.
BHO vs JMcC = Oligarchy candidate A vs Oligarchy candidate B
If you want progressive government then vote for progressive candidates. Don't vote for bought-and-paid-for shills who can read a script.
At the minimum, when the Pollsters call, lie and say you're voting Green or Nader. BHO et al would s**t their pants if a poll came back 30% Nader...
You think 30% of the country reads Common Dreams?
Joe
Obama proudly declares he ill "protect Israel" in his coronation speech last night in Denver, and Joe Biden says he is a "Zionist":
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YmD0G2iASk0&eurl=http://www.davidduke.com...
As long as APIC is calling the shots, nothing is different between McBama and OCain.
I know a lot about the AIPAC influence in Washington.
But your generalization from the similarity in this instance to everything else is clearly nonsensical. Apparently you never bothered to make a comparison between the two candidates.
-=-=-=-=-=-=-
Let's elect Obama and support Progressive Democrats of America http://pdamerica.org to convince him that progressive policies make sense and resonate with people's ultimate desire for peace, sustainability, and responsible economics.
"...convince him that progressive policies make sense..."
How are you going to do that? Do you have his phone number or email address? What if he doesn't want to listen? What if his corporate donors and neo-con advisers tell him to ignore progressives? Certain corporations have given him a lot of money and that money doesn't come without the expectation of big favors.
He used the progressive and anti-war movements to get the nomination, then brushed us aside. He doesn't need us anymore.
Where has that been tried before? With Bill Clinton, the guy who brought you NAFTA, the Balkans war, did away with welfare, sheesh....
Whooptedoo - I'm twirling my finger.
Is he going to withdraw from Iraq and Afghanistan? Close our 700+ military bases overseas? Shut down the Federal Reserve and restore money creation to the U.S. Government? Restore our civil rights embodied in the Bill of Rights?
I can just about guarantee the answer to all these questions is NO.
Let's see a list of his campaign donors. That would be indicative of his future policies.
Dave
http://daveeriqat.wordpress.com/
Obama Vows To Deliver A Better Future For America
-I hope so because this is what Democrats have delivered so far:
1) Refuse to stop funding the war
2) Refuse to impeach Bush
3) Refuse to hold Bush accountable for torturing
4) Allow right-wingers like Mukasey to be confirmed
5) Confirmed right-wingers into the Supreme Court
6) Rubber stamp gargantuan military budgets
7) Allow Bush to spew 935 lies about the war
8) Allow Cheny to out CIA agents and defy subpoenas
9) Granted Bush and the Telecoms immunity
10) Insert your favorite Democratic Party capitulation here: _____________________________.
Unfortunately, we can add many more items to the list. If elected, Obama/Biden will also certainly not pursue Bush/Cheney and their supporters. They'll then be private citizens, and there's a private mercenary army in Iraq. Who'll be in charge of that? I've not heard anything from the Obama/Biden camp about abandoning the use of mercenaries. So either they're cool with it, or else Bush and his group will remain awfully powerful -- and perhaps pretty much unscrutinized -- as private citizens.
Nader is right -- the Democrats are a cesspool of politics. There's a reason they don't go after Republicans, put up a genuine fight, etc. They're basically Republicans with make-up on, perhaps literally and figuratively.
Wow, do you think McCain will have the guts to offer the promise "a better future for America"?
Obama sure is a Maverick!
To avoid painting the back fence I have been watching important things on tv.
I caught the Olympics, including the fire works display to close those games in Beijing.
I caught the fire works closing the Demo Convention last eve.
I now have a rough idea who has the most spare change for that sort of thing.
Loud noises and bright lights sure do inspire the voters, don't they?
Whether you like it or not, the fact is that after the elections the US will either be governed
by John Mccain or Barack Obama.
One or the other.
NOT by Nader or Barr or Mickey Mouse.
So, what's it gonna be?
Make a rational choice based on the real options, not some 'moral high ground' fantasy.
I happen to be priviledged, comparatively wealthy, speak two foreign languages fluently, and carry a European pass port. I'm gonna be out of here if this place turns to shit. YOU will be stuck.
Just ask those less privileged whether they'll be better served by an Obama administration that sets new priorities and try to tell them how much purer your Nader "choice" is. Vote Nader in the safe states, if you are registered there but a swing state vote for Nader is a vote for a continuation of the slide into fascism under Mccain. Period.
-=-=-=-=-=-=-
Let's elect Obama and support Progressive Democrats of America http://pdamerica.org to convince him that progressive policies make sense and resonate with people's ultimate desire for peace, sustainability, and responsible economics.
quark -- it REALLY doesn't matter now does it? A majority Congress in 2006 didn't make a difference, and neither will the man who wants to bring us "clean coal" and "safe nuclear power". Oh, golly, I can hardly wait!
Mine and my family's will be a vote for Nader. We're not voting for any military industrial complex chosen and approved candidates any longer. This IS a rational choice. "...a swing state vote for Nader is a vote for a continuation of the slide into fascism". No. It is not. Voting for the candidate of the Democratic Party candidate once again is voting for the party that allowed, aided and abetted the slide into fascism in the first place. Or haven't you noticed? The Democratic Party that aided and abetted the fascists for the past almost 8 years. By the way, regardless of whether McCain or Obama wins, we will not be governed BY them. They are mere figureheads for the rich ruling elite that run everything. Obama supports neo-liberalism, and neo-liberalism IS NOT sustainable nor is it "responsible economics". Run Ralph. Run!
Rational is not the same as rationalizing. When your symbolic Nader vote effects to get the worse of the two candidates elected then your vote accomplishes nothing. I hypothesize that many Nader voters are similar to those Evangelicals who want to hasten world war III and thereby Armageddon so they get raptured into paradise once the smoke clears.
Ludicrous. I'm calling your vote defeatist.
The main problem is that people think that voting is the be all and end all instead of starting to getting engaged. Progressive Democrats of America is a way to support real progressives within this fairly rotten party. They exist but they depend on vocal support to broaden their influence.
Don't wait for Canada to invade.
-=-=-=-=-=-=-
Let's elect Obama and support Progressive Democrats of America http://pdamerica.org to convince him that progressive policies make sense and resonate with people's ultimate desire for peace, sustainability, and responsible economics.
When the world begins and ends in a presidential campaign, then perhaps you make sense. Unfortunately, cause-and-effect is a lot more complex and goes back further than now.
We got to where we are exactly by the "least-worst" mentality that's being trotted out here as somehow moral. "Oh good! He eats fewer kittens. It's the new liberalism!"
That, friends, is truly defeatist.
A vote for McCain or Obama is a vote for the pro-Bush, pro-war, pro-corporate, anti-US Constitution Status Quo. Period.
Any votes for McCain or Walk On Water Obama will be taking votes away from the real, true, legitimate progressives:
Nader/Gonzalez 2008 (if there is an "election")
Great speech by a gifted speaker
I will only start celebrating once he actually puts his words to action.
With McCain is its over
Really? What about the corrupt, easily-hackable electronic voting machines? Remember 2000 and 2004? We still have the same system.
obama stands for continued occupation of the ME. that is absolutely clear from the speech. we are in the clutches of people who are destroying this country.
Ah, here we are: we CommonDreams' posters (a.k.a., we, the people) ... hidden.
Out of sight, out of mind, CD ownership? ... For shame, for shame!
Interestingly enough, CommonDreams posters are, for the most part, TO THE LEFT of CommonDreams ownership. For example, no doubt those *own* CommonDreams will endorse Barack Obama for president, as they did Kerry in 2004 and Gore in 2000 -- but, lo and behold, notice how many CD posters, in fact, DON'T support Barack Obama and the DLC-controlled Democratic Party but, instead, support Nader or McKinney or some other genuinely progressive candidate.
You know, the voice of the people can be *such* a bother sometimes, can't it? Especially to those at the top.
In any event, Donna Volatile wrote a very interesting article that recently appeared at counterpunch.org entitled "The Obama Construct."
After pointing out that Barack Obama is a.) willing to keep a "residual force" in Iraq for an indefinite period of time; b.) wants to escalate the war in Afghanistan, and
c.) is willing to invade both Pakistan and Iran, Ms. Volatile writes:
"McCain is a war mongering bully who is in your face, Obama, on the other hand, is a smooth talker, whose own Foreign policy positions aren't too far removed from McCain's and one has to wonder which is worse, or indeed if there really is any difference at all. (The idea of voting for the lesser of two evils, McCain being the more evil, according to Obama supporters, seems ludicrous given that both of these candidates will ultimately do the bidding of their masters and the master plan is the same for both parties. This should be quite apparent by now and if it isn't, well, by all means vote for Obama and reap your just rewards...Do you really think 'Obomba's' idea of war will be kinder and gentler than McCain's?...)
"Obama supporters will tell you 'but he's honest and so sincere', and 'he's run a clean campaign' or 'he's one of us' (that one always gets me) but they remain blinded to what is obvious to many on the radical left and many on the traditional conservative/libertarian right: Obama is a player and he is playing the game of the global elitists.
"Since he has all but secured his party's nomination, he's becoming more militaristic by the minute, in both tone and by his stance on several key Foreign policy issues.
"Obama and his VP Choice, Senator Biden, however, are not the crux of the problem but rather the mainstream voters are the problem as they continue to enable the corrupt two party system by consistently supporting the candidates being foisted upon them by controllers who select them in the first place and who are reinforced by the mainstream media machine in the second. These are not choices, these are lack of choices and if voters continue to participate in this sham, then they truly get what they deserve!
"With Obama supporters, the phrase 'blinded by the light' takes on a whole new meaning. What part don't you get?! (This is the party threatening to place demonstrators at the DNC in recently erected detention camps and the party whose House majority leader, Nancy Pelosi, ridicules the anti-war movement and the homeless: 'If they were poor and they were sleeping on my sidewalk, they'd be arrested for loitering but because they have 'Impeach Bush' across their chest, it's the First Amendment.' Funny how both parties get upset over that whole free speech thing...)
"What is most stunning about delusional Obama supporters is, when confronted by the aforementioned facts about Obama, they counter with this inane idea that Obama is only 'saying' these things, he doesn't really mean them, it's only to get elected and once he gets elected the true altruistic essence of the man will save us all from tyranny! (Can we say reality check?!)
"Their indefensible support of this double talker is beyond comprehension. ...
If you want to help put a stop to the rigged election game, if you really want to make a difference and you want your voice of disapproval to be heard, then do VOTE! Vote for ANYBODY but the two buffoons, who have been pre-selected for you by the global elitist machine. Send a message, loud and clear: We refuse your choices.
"Vote Nader, vote McKinney, vote Ron Paul, vote Bob Barr, write in a vote, do whatever but don't support the corrupt system. Commit to a protest vote. Vote your conscience, do not vote under the 'lesser of two-evils' threat because then YOU are part of the problem, not part of the possible solution. (We've been on this trip too many times before ... From 'hope and help is on the way' Kerry to Obama's constant harping on 'Change We Can Believe In', you have been sold a bill of goods from first to last. For all of Obama's talk of change, his words and actions show quite clearly, he means more of the same...)
"For those die hard Obama supporters who refuse to see the hand writing on the wall... YOU are the problem... For those die-hard Hillary Clinton supporters, promising to vote for McCain because your war-monger wasn't the chosen one, seek psychiatric help immediately.
"And one more thing ... Evil is evil, bad is bad, wrong is wrong regardless of sex, race, creed or color.
"And another thing ... If you vote for Obama, you are neither liberal nor are you progressive, so let's get that straight. If you vote for Obama, you are a neoliberal, so get use to it.
"Stop making excuses, there are none and time is running out as an even larger war may be in the making.
"Get those blinders off!
"This is your wake up call!"
(Words in parenthesis Ms. Volatile's)
Click here for the entire article -- http://www.counterpunch.org/volatile08282008.html
I would be interested in the owners of CD as well. Long ago I concluded - based primarily on the authors - that CD is, in fact, a mainstream site! In fact, I moved its bookmark from my "alternative" category to my "mainstream" category.
Recently they published a statement that confirmed my suspicions about its mainstream character. The statement ( http://www.commondreams.org/home-page-new-cms-announcement ) said that readers were put off by the comments! The only readers that would be put off by the comments are mainstream-type readers, like people who watch Faux News and such. I can't imagine any true "progressive" being put off by the comments, which I think are quite good, by the way.
Dave
http://daveeriqat.wordpress.com/
I recently started visiting the site and was put off by the comments. It's difficult to explain my politics in a word but I'm sure they aren't mainstream and I do agree with much I read here and some I don't. I've voted for Na