Twitter
StumbleUpon
Facebook
Delicious
Digg
Newsvine
Google
Yahoo
TechnoratiThe World's Verdict Will Be Harsh if the US Rejects the Man It Yearns For
An America that disdains Obama for his global support risks turning current anti-Bush feeling into something far worse
The feeling is familiar. I had it four years ago and four years before that: a sinking feeling in the stomach. It's a kind of physical pessimism which says: "It's happening again. The Democrats are about to lose an election they should win - and it could not matter more."
In my head, I'm not as anxious for Barack Obama's chances as I was for John Kerry's in 2004 or Al Gore's in 2000. He is a better candidate than both put together, and all the empirical evidence says this year favours Democrats more than any since 1976. But still, I can't shake off the gloom.
Look at yesterday's opinion polls, which have John McCain either in a dead heat with Obama or narrowly ahead. Given the well-documented tendency of African-American candidates to perform better in polls than in elections - thanks to people who say they will vote for a black man but don't - this suggests Obama is now trailing badly. More troubling was the ABC News-Washington Post survey which found McCain ahead among white women by 53% to 41%. Two weeks ago, Obama had a 15% lead among women. There is only one explanation for that turnaround, and it was not McCain's tranquilliser of a convention speech: Obama's lead has been crushed by the Palin bounce.
So you can understand my pessimism. But it's now combined with a rising frustration. I watch as the Democrats stumble, uncertain how to take on Sarah Palin. Fight too hard, and the Republican machine, echoed by the ditto-heads in the conservative commentariat on talk radio and cable TV, will brand Democrats sexist, elitist snobs, patronising a small-town woman. Do nothing, and Palin's rise will continue unchecked, her novelty making even Obama look stale, her star power energising and motivating the Republican base.
So somehow Palin slips out of reach, no revelation - no matter how jaw-dropping or career-ending were it applied to a normal candidate - doing sufficient damage to slow her apparent march to power, dragging the charisma-deprived McCain behind her.
We know one of Palin's first acts as mayor of tiny Wasilla, Alaska was to ask the librarian the procedure for banning books. Oh, but that was a "rhetorical" question, says the McCain-Palin campaign. We know Palin is not telling the truth when she says she was against the notorious $400m "Bridge to Nowhere" project in Alaska - in fact, she campaigned for it - but she keeps repeating the claim anyway. She denounces the dipping of snouts in the Washington trough - but hired costly lobbyists to make sure Alaska got a bigger helping of federal dollars than any other state.
She claims to be a fiscal conservative, but left Wasilla saddled with debts it had never had before. She even seems to have claimed "per diem" allowances - taxpayers' money meant for out-of-town travel - when she was staying in her own house.
Yet somehow none of this is yet leaving a dent. The result is that a politician who conservative blogger Andrew Sullivan calls a "Christianist" - seeking to politicise Christianity the way Islamists politicise Islam - could soon be a heartbeat away from the presidency. Remember, this is a woman who once addressed a church congregation, saying of her work as governor - transport, policing and education - "really all of that stuff doesn't do any good if the people of Alaska's heart isn't right with God".
If Sarah Palin defies the conventional wisdom that says elections are determined by the top of the ticket, and somehow wins this for McCain, what will be the reaction? Yes, blue-state America will go into mourning once again, feeling estranged in its own country. A generation of young Americans - who back Obama in big numbers - will turn cynical, concluding that politics doesn't work after all. And, most depressing, many African-Americans will decide that if even Barack Obama - with all his conspicuous gifts - could not win, then no black man can ever be elected president.
But what of the rest of the world? This is the reaction I fear most. For Obama has stirred an excitement around the globe unmatched by any American politician in living memory. Polling in Germany, France, Britain and Russia shows that Obama would win by whopping majorities, with the pattern repeated in Africa, Asia, the Middle East and Latin America. If November 4 were a global ballot, Obama would win it handsomely. If the free world could choose its leader, it would be Barack Obama.
The crowd of 200,000 that rallied to hear him in Berlin in July did so not only because of his charisma, but also because they know he, like the majority of the world's population, opposed the Iraq war. McCain supported it, peddling the lie that Saddam was linked to 9/11. Non-Americans sense that Obama will not ride roughshod over the international system but will treat alliances and global institutions seriously: McCain wants to bypass the United Nations in favour of a US-friendly League of Democracies. McCain might talk a good game on climate change, but a repeated floor chant at the Republican convention was "Drill, baby, drill!", as if the solution to global warming were not a radical rethink of the US's entire energy system but more offshore oil rigs.
If Americans choose McCain, they will be turning their back on the rest of the world, choosing to show us four more years of the Bush-Cheney finger. And I predict a deeply unpleasant shift.
Until now, anti-Americanism has been exaggerated and much misunderstood: outside a leftist hardcore, it has mostly been anti-Bushism, opposition to this specific administration. But if McCain wins in November, that might well change. Suddenly Europeans and others will conclude that their dispute is with not only one ruling clique, but Americans themselves. For it will have been the American people, not the politicians, who will have passed up a once-in-a-generation chance for a fresh start - a fresh start the world is yearning for.
And the manner of that decision will matter, too. If it is deemed to have been about race - that Obama was rejected because of his colour - the world's verdict will be harsh. In that circumstance, Slate's Jacob Weisberg wrote recently, international opinion would conclude that "the United States had its day, but in the end couldn't put its own self-interest ahead of its crazy irrationality over race".
Even if it's not ethnic prejudice, but some other aspect of the culture wars, that proves decisive, the point still holds. For America to make a decision as grave as this one - while the planet boils and with the US fighting two wars - on the trivial basis that a hockey mom is likable and seems down to earth, would be to convey a lack of seriousness, a fleeing from reality, that does indeed suggest a nation in, to quote Weisberg, "historical decline". Let's not forget, McCain's campaign manager boasts that this election is "not about the issues."
Of course I know that even to mention Obama's support around the world is to hurt him. Incredibly, that large Berlin crowd damaged Obama at home, branding him the "candidate of Europe" and making him seem less of a patriotic American. But what does that say about today's America, that the world's esteem is now unwanted? If Americans reject Obama, they will be sending the clearest possible message to the rest of us - and, make no mistake, we shall hear it.
221 Comments so far
Show AllWhy is a vote for Obama not a vote for something terrible? Because he is running
against McCain/Palin!
This will the Bush regime and worse.It is on the record in Alaska that her "administrations" were full of secrecy, deceit and vindictiveness and that comes from bipartisan input.Sadly she is "ready" in the sense that she already operates in the manner of our current regime...including substituting reckless "resolve" for diplomacy and governance.
Reducing an critical election to personality instead of issues shows exactly what we've become as a country.
If McCain wins hopefully the Common Dreamers will act,instead of mourning, to take the country back.
What are Americans who don't agree with Bush or McCain supposed to do if they can't prevail? I don't see the UK opening its doors to us so we can get out. In fact, I have always hated the phrase "love it or leave it" since leaving it is not a realistic option for the majority of us.
Americans who do NOT agree with McBush are supposed to to the same thing that Americans who DO agree with them do in the event the other side prevails.
Deal with it. In a democracy, expect your side to lose half of the time. If the Republicans publicize articles like this, as well as some of the America-hating comments on these forums, expect to lose MORE than half the time.
As someone has mentioned, the Democrats won the presidency in the 2000 and 2004 elections, but failed to contest massive fraud. Half of the voting population doesn't even bother to vote. Under such circumstances, who will the world blame?
The U.S. colonies once rebelled against far-away British rule, but now they have the tricky task of trying to gain political control in a rigged domestic process. The United States is a land controlled by corporations. Elections are pretty much a shut-out of citizen views. People abroad may be confused by the U.S. convention shows, which aren't democratic processes. Look to the outside, the demonstrators arrested by police in riot gear, for the true story of U.S. democracy. You have the freedom of speech and assembly - the freedom to be thrown in jail for it.
Freedland (ironic last name?) must be talking about the Brit-U.S. alliance, when he refers to the world not forgiving the United States should McCain win. The rest of the world pretty much hates the United States for its policies. Ask Pakistanis or Afghanis if they will be thrilled with Obama ("I'll bomb ya") becoming president. Do they want to be attacked, as Obama promises? What about Iraq, which has asked for U.S. withdrawal? Does Iraq want to wait for U.S. generals to tell Obama that now's the time for withdrawal? I think not, but that's Obama's plan.
We U.S. citizens live in the belly of the beast. It may seem odd that we have no control over our internal politics, but I think that's a fair statement. It's not just mechanical voting that's a problem. We just aren't represented. Freedland hasn't looked at Obama's statements carefully enough in making his plea. He is confused by the "hopeful" messages, perhaps. On most issues, Obama's policies and McCain's policies mirror one another, and that's especially true with foreign policy.
Hate to break it to Freedland, but Obama wants to drill too. He recently echoed Nancy Pelosi on doing so. It's another issue where the two parties agree.
The question to Freedland and the world is this: do we really have a choice in this election, or are the two presidential candidates' positions largely the same? If their policies are the same, then we don't have a choice. I think that's where we are right now, except if people opt for a third party - that is the action that must be done.
The United States will gain respect in the world when it becomes a more democratic country, but it can't be a democratic country if Republicans or Democrats are in power. They represent the corporate rule that locks out our views.
-TIA
This country is a poor excuse for a democracy and the electoral college systempunctutes that thought. Yes the election was stolen twice in the USA and in any other country this brazen criminal act would have led to national strikes for days. For those who yearn for nader in this crroked system wake up from fantasy.
Yes Mr. Bell has it right, this is a country that cannot be believed by those apart from it. it was forged by revulsion of the Brits and shaped in the later centuries by the Hollywood myth.
I have followed here in the CD Liberal thinking world of thought and have patiently read the thoughts of dreamers, the pseudo intellectuals, and the great scholars who think they have the sort of thinking to be able to help bring this country back from the horrid mess it has become and the abyss it has brought the world.
Those here who offer their great ideas to help us to think more clearly pride themselves that they can influence direction in this plutocracy. None here have touched the central issue, this countries greed, the economy and your 401ks. You have been sold this means of security and you have bought it as good Americans. Most here believe it is your way to survival. But we see time and again that World street cares not a wit for American or human survival. Greed is a very difficult and human characteristic that holds nothing or no one sacred, as of course some of you know.
The essence of the fight for human retrieval and the reestablishment of ethics, morals and purpose, that so many who write her would like to see, is the reason people spend there time reading many of these petty responses to the problems we face. Those who respond to the articles here, written by people who are surely less than the quality of the true thinkers likes Nietzsche, Camus, Dostoevsky and so many others who wrote about human fallibility, the human condition and power, so well.
Those who write here, are people generally frustrated and feel helpless in terms of where we see this entire human global adventure going and see clearly that this American election can possibly hold the seeds to genuine change in this country if not the world. However, many are not fooled by the array of candidates and their claims to complete truth and fairness, as it should be. A healthy pessimism is necessary so long as it is not cynicism.
However the McCain Palin disaster throws all previous pessimism about American politics once and for all out the window to be replaces by cynicism where it should rest. Some of us understand that survival is surely not based in the petty politics practiced here on this blog but a clear recognition that there are people writing whom genuinely care about the sate of this power gone amuck called the USA.
Sadly, we all know that the slate of candidates running leave a great deal to be desired. Yes, they have all dissembled, as politicians are wont to do, in the endless necessity for compromise. One cannot come from the masses, be a politician who aspires to become president of this woebegone culture and not have to assume the sickening compromises that would attract support to continue on the quest and be pure. Impossible! When I think of the charges against Obama that he supported that toad, Joe Lieberman I have to laugh at the simplistic charges and the lack of understanding of what is necessary to be a politician in this country, no soul!
But there are some who hold out the small hope that if Obama, the lesser of all the evils presented to the electorate, somehow becomes president he may become another great man in the office and in effect serve the people, the country and the globe. He is the only one who holds that possibility, without question if we join and accept some of the thinking here. It is so because of his background, his actions in Chicago, despite his missteps and the fact that this is the final chance at survival for the human family!
We must take this chance and hope that the creeping filth that has brought humanity to this pass will not assassinate him; if he truly tries to affect the changes that must take place in this country for it to be able to take the lead in the world once again as it once did, based in truth, and caring and concern for what humanity confronts. The need now, as never before to the present degree, is to help draw the world back from the nightmare now taking place. as we see him withdraw from his principles and his early rhetoric we know that he has had to sell out to the DNC and power politics. However, looking at the republican slate offered to the USA his was a minor aberration.
The climate, energy, food, water, the oceans, forests and so many other issues will require a man that has the youth and the guts to try to bring about the change that is fundamental to his campaign alone, since he has captured the belief of so many that believed it to be impossible. However, in the end it all may be too late!
What's that called when nobody else's opinion matters?
liberalism because no other group tries so hard to silence the opposition.
what you smokin? And from a person (well some thing anyway) with the handle 'real world'??
You're obviously past redemption, but for others that might actually believe your crap (as too many are inclined to do these days)
better read up on liberalism... and media watchdog studies - or just think of the Dixie Chicks. And oh yeah, what do you types call the media? Liberal?? And who tends to invoke the right of freedom of speech? And the president of which party has been the most secretive? And so on and so on and so on.
But remember, you're either with us or against us... so love it or leave it.
Two questions:
Who, EXACTLY, "silenced" the Dixie Chicks? They exercised their freedom to say whatever they wanted to, and country fans, the vast majority of whom disagreed with them, exercised their freedom to not spend any more money on them. What is the problem?
EVERY TIME a speaker is shouted down or threatened off a university campus, is it liberals or conservatives doing the censoring?
bigotry
Why do you pretend that the elections in the USA are honest? The ballots are electronically counted in a significant portion of the nation.
Documented evidence has shown clearly and convinencingly that elections were stolen by fraud in Florida (2000) and Ohio (2004).
Until the population understands and appreciates that the elections are a national fraud by the Democrats and Republicans, nothing will change.
No it hasn't; you should quit whining. EVERY count taken in Florida shows Bush winning by a handful of votes; and if the Democrats in W Palm Beach were too STUPID to figure out the ballot that their own party approved, that is not "fraud", it is simply pathetic.
Bush won in 2004 by three million votes. Fraud? I doubt it.
Is EVERY election your side loses ALWAYS fraud?
I guess thinking that makes you feel better, if nothing else...
My guess is the election has to be close for them to steal it. Within maybe 6% points. If its' a landslide they can't explain the exit poll switch.
And given American gullibility, that won't be hard.
McCain ads
Maybe Europe yearns for Barack Obama for America, and maybe America yearns for Vladimir Putin for Europe.
The only difference is that after the last American soldier is withdrawn from Europe, Europe won't have a chance to reject the man that America yearns for.
European armies are nothing but under-equipped militias, and when Putin wants to turn Cannes into the new Yalta, he won't have to risk losing an election.
Nudge nudge.
Wink wink!
Jacob Freeze
vox,
You need to read the article more carefully. The first answer there is that Barack Obama is a figure that will instantly command the world's respect like JFK.
Second, he's good at speeches, and giving speeches in the main thing an American president does.
Third, black people will feel good. We white Americans owe something to persons of color, you know. Only an idiot would fail to understand this, a member of "The United States of Amnesia."
As for the next sixty reasons, it would do you good to figure them out on your own.
goodness! you can't be serious!
well, i guess i'm a member of "the united states of amnesia" then based on your logic.
so let's just vote based on lofty rhetoric and on whether a certain segment of the population will "feel good." great.... even if it's against their best interests in the end......get a half black man in there so that his skin color will appease the black population. please, enough of this madness. no wonder we can't seem to work to give third parties due consideration against the hegemonic block of the corporate parties when we have people who could care less about the real issues that matter to all americans across the racial spectrum.
"Third, black people will feel good."
Now there's a great reason to elect obama. Let's please 12% of the population over the other 88%.
COCO: Loved the British redux scenario & its humor. Thanks for sharing your post.
you'll have to start practicing siouxrose. it's humour now, not humor........lol
Freedman is kidding, isn't he?
The Vietnam War wasn't enough to turn "the world" (by which, I assume, he means Nice Polite Europe) against us; twelve years of Reagan-Bush I didn't do it; eight years of Bush II haven't done it.
I remember watching, with bitter contempt, Germans protesting Pershing and Cruise missiles in 1984, Marlboros and Camels firmly clenched between their collective teeth.
But if I can force myself to be charitable for a moment: It's not as though Europeans have a choice in the matter. Their "left" parties have all been coopted by the corporate interests of the right. This is how one gets people like Tony Blair, Gerhard Schroeder, Franz Vranitzky, Jacques Chirac, etc. etc. etc. all busily ripping up their national social nets and supporting American policies up to (Schroeder, Chirac) or even beyond (Blair) the gorge level of their own people. In Europe, just as in the USA and Canada, left parties have been reduced to "me-too" parties representing a kindler, gentler right.
Freedland does have one good point: Obama will have to poll well above 50% in order to win: Rethugs will be pulling massive voter-intimidation and voter roll purge stunts, and working their fraudulent magic on vote counts wherever they can. Then there's the "Bradley Effect"--people who will tell total strangers (e.g. pollsters) they'll vote for a black man because they feel enough shame not to tell the truth: namely, that they'd never vote for a black man.
How much different would an Obama presidency be from a McCain presidency? Of course we can't read the future, but by now we know that although an Obama presidency would be vastly preferable, he's far from the fundamental change the country needs. The doomsday question is whether McCain would accelerate the slide into fascism currently underway. Rest assured that if the economy gets much worse, Americans will be seeking easy scapegoats, and they've of course already been identified: African-American "welfare parasites," Latino "job thieves," "feminazi" and "sodomite" threats to the nation's moral health, and history's once and future golden-oldie bogeyman, the Jew. By selecting someone of the likes of Palin, McCain demonstrates that he's already willing to play that game just to get elected. The thought that McCain might be only a Lueger but not a Hitler, however, isn't exactly comforting.
So why were you watching Germans demonstrating against having been selected as the operating theatre of the next nuclear war by the Reagan administration "with bitter contempt"?????
So people like you who - contrary to you - KNOW what war means, i.e. NOT the kind of stupid bravado Americans make it out to be, are not allowed to protest the cynical positioning of their country as being the first line of attack in the case of a nuclear war? Against their own people? These rockets were supposed to be stationed along the German-German border, right??
Well, I hope to be able to watch Americans with "bitter contempt" when they are protesting when Chinese or Russian nuclear rockets are going to be stationed along, let's say, the Mason-Dixon line. Or along the Mississippi. That'll be my day.
So much for typically American ignorance.
Not only German protests, BTW. Reagan was loathed as much as Bush around the world, and quite rightly so. 1/8 of the Netherlands were out protesting against these rockets on a single day. For example.
For the rest, I agree with your comments, strangely enough. Except that I don't think that anyone has a snowball's chance in hell to win a US presidential election by stating that s/he REALLY wants to change the country dramatically. The USA are called "structurally conservative" in Europe, after all.
So even if you had a great agenda, you would be well advised not to kill your chances by revealing it, see Kucinich's or Nader's fate. They'll eat you alive or just ignore you. Let's hope that Obama isn't showing his hand and actually has a few aces up his sleeve.
And re change: You definitely want to watch the Daily Show's take on these messages: http://www.thedailyshow.com/index.jhtml
Sheesh, of all the world, GERMANS certainly "know what war means"; they have started enough of them. They are also experts in "knowing" what genocide means...
Araquin: Bitter contempt because the utter shallowness of their opposition was apparent from their total thrall to American consumerism.
And as for your third paragraph, surely you've figured out by now that the vast majority of Americans are too complacent to protest anything except obstacles to their further plunder of the planet.
And yeah yeah yeah, Reagan was loathed around the world -- and the world didn't do a damn thing about it. Just as the world will sit idly by and cluck piously when the US of A destroys its next "threat" (probably Iran), meanwhile continuing to buy American products and cutting deals with the American government.
[I remember watching, with bitter contempt, Germans protesting Pershing and Cruise missiles in 1984, Marlboros and Camels firmly clenched between their collective teeth.]
How on earth do you know what they were smoking? You can read the name on the butt in a person's mouth amongst 10,000 people in the picture?
Also, at the time, Camel and Marlboro were by far the leading cigarette brands. And they come in easily identifiable packs of 20, wouldn't you know.
Just about everyone I knew who didn't smoke American cigarettes rolled their own.
I knew some of these folks personally. At the time, I was living in Germany.
Next question?
umm, okay, FreedLAND. :-)
Since when does living overseas give one more foresight into the political candidates to be found here in the United States? All I saw at the mass rally Obama spoke to last summer was a quarter of a million people badly in need of a cult figure. Obama fit that bill. But his speech, a piece of recycled cold war horse manure, remains horse manure. As he said himself of another candidacy, you can put lipstick on a pig, but it's still a pig.
The left cant get it together! Verbal masturbation ad nauseum! No wonder why the right
wing is winning! Half of the PROGRESSIVE movement is filled with blowhards and
cowards. What a sorry state of affairs. You people are the inheritors of generations
of struggle and now have a means of communication not dreamed of before. Shame on you
and your ilk. You are standing on the shoulders of giants, pissing on them.
Of course there is a difference between the two parties on a lot of important
issues. At the same time the democrats are woefully out of touch with the
majority of its constituents.
It comes down to two choices, vote for a third party candidate, don't vote,
or vote for Obama. Obama is not great, he is not a saviour, but the truth is
he is our only chance right now. No third party is viable right now on the
national level, locally that is a different story.
The truth is a "protest" vote for anyone else is pretty much irrelevant
right now. I don't know what NADER'S reason for running is but I would trust
KUCINICH'S judgment over his any day.
I think the only choice we have right now is to vote for OBAMA even if we
don't agree with many of his stances and hope that he moves more to the left
when he gets in.
I know we all were really disappointed with CLINTON when he got in office
I think that things could be different with OBAMA even just for the very sake
that as a man of color he would be less willing to sell out the poor and middle
class and be the new caricature of UNCLE TOM for the foreseeable future.
I know we are supposed to be the good guys and that CD is supposed to be
one of the best sites around but half of what I see here is downright baloney,
even with some of the articles. I know people can lose sight of their navels
when fighting the good fight but really, FREEDLANDER is judging AMERICANS
pretty harshly, after all BUSH did not win either election.
As far as judging the US on it's treatment of minorities, EUROPE has not
much to be proud of. By the way, when was the last time EUROPE elected a person
of color, or even had them in the running?
We in the US are up against it, the media is outrageous and we are in the
belly of the beast, just look at what happens when people try to protest here..
OUCH!!
I know half of this country is asleep but FREEDLANDER should not lump all
of us together like bad potato salad. Our education system is crap, our police
are out of control and our media has control of all intercourse except sexual.
EGADS!!! This place sucks but if OBAMA does not get in our voices are
drowned out even more and with the shrill whining from all these so called
liberals, that is not a good sign.
If OBAMA wins there will still be much work to do but at least we can
breathe a collective sigh, or as Whitney Houston said....never mind.
Europe wasn't founded on genocide of the indigenous population, like the US were.
Although there was genocide particularly in the Middle Ages, particularly ordained by the Catholic Church when North-Eastern Europe was christianized by force. And the holocaust, of course.
Europe does not have citizens of coloour who have been around a lot longer than the ones who are actually in charge of power. In other words: Black slaves arrived in America before most of the white immigrants.
Large-scale immigration to Europe by non-whites is a very recent thing, though, less than a generation.
Contrary to America. Blacks in America are as a group the oldest immigrants. And do you want me to mention the fate of the American Indians?
Or need I point out that a nauseating mass murderer like Andrew Jackson still has his portrait on dollar bills and has towns called after him?
We don't have any Hitlervilles in Europe. Which would be a valid parallel when it comes to celebrating mass murderers.
So you can't compare the situations. America still hasn't even acknowledged its oldest group of immigrants, the African Americans, let alone the indigenous population, i.e. American Indians, and you are demanding that Europe should acknowledge its most recent group of immigrants.
In Europe, we aren't just some settlers who snatched land from others and killed off the original inhabitants. You are ingoring the fact that African slaves had been in the US for much longer than all these late 19th century and early 20th century immigrants who feel like they own the place today. Hardly any American I've met was more that 4th generation American. NO black I've met was less than 6th generation, and I've met many.
In Europe, WE are the indigenous people who've been around for millenia. Everyone else mostly only came within the last few decades.
So since it has been taking the USA 250 years to get an African American on a ticket ALTHOUGH they are the group who's been there longer than most whites, and never any of the indigenous peoples, give us some time. They are in parliaments and they are members of governments already in Europe, after all. Which is a lot faster than how long it took them in the USA to get there.
Europe was not founded on Genocide? Is your inferiority complex towards America delusioning you?
WHO, exactly, do you think caused the population of Aztecs, Mayas, and Incas to decline by approximately 95% in the early 16th century?
Once your friendly, peaceful Europeans got done that, they colonized Uruguay, Argentina and Chile, which were full of a number of today forgotten Indian tribes. Today, these three countries are the WHITEST countries in the world, far more so than either the United States or any European country. Why? The European genocide on the Indians, of course. You do not have to worry about Indian reservations or casinos if you kill ALL of them....
Was it Americans who did a genocide on the people of the Congo? Of course not, it was Belgians. Was it Americans who killed the Jews, Gypsies and homosexuals in WWII? Nah, it was peaceful European Germans.
Who, I wonder, committed genocide in Algeria in 1960? Not the Americans, the European French.
When genocide was committed a scant ten years ago in Bosnia and Kosovo, it was not Americans doing it. Nor is it Americans committing genocide TODAY in Chechynia. Genocide is an almost exclusively European trait.
MORON.
ARAQUIN-
That is some crazy stuff man! What are you smokin?
Anyway I am just pointing out that FREEDLANDER may be simplifying things to put all the blame on the USA PEOPLES if OBAMA is not elected.
To just touch on some of your points. Many of which are the reason why we are so divided in the first place. We can't really come to any consensus about anything here in USA, not even in electing our AMERICAN IDOL.
Our MISS TEEN USA'S are functionally illiterate and the populace is suffering from CPO. CELL PHONE OVERACTIVITY.
Despite the influx of witty BRIT COMEDIES infiltrating our borders it is all canceled out by the unbelievable hotness of POSH SPICE and DAVID BECKHAM.
Seriously man, USA is a fascist state right now, big time. I would call it ORWELLIAN but that name has been copyrighted by FOX NEWS.
I think everyone is just secretly waiting for the 2012 planetary alignment to do anything, just in case.
I wish I could talk more about the Holocaust and the Black Plague and how it excuses FREEDLANDER from oversimplifying things but I have to get to my Hasty Pudding.
You say, "Obama is not great, he is not a saviour, but the truth is he is our only chance right now."
Our only chance for what? Bad government? Wall Street pandering? More lies about NAFTA like he told in Ohio?
Tell me, exactly, why a vote for Obama isn't a vote for something terrible.
http://voxsjournal.livejournal.com
Vox.What is a better alternative in you humble opinion? Right now, that is? I
am not a huge OBAMA fan by the way....but what makes you think things wont be much
worse for progressives, for poor people, for people of color if McCain/Palin are in
power?
Why don't you ask Iraq's if they think it wouldn't have mattered to have Gore
or Kerry elected. You really don't think that there is not a little more
accountability and pragmatism when it comes to the Dems?
What are you solutions? Judging from your tone, though, I am not expecting much.
highkarate September 13th, 2008 3:32 pm
"Why don't you ask Iraq's if they think it wouldn't have mattered to have Gore
or Kerry elected."
Strawman arguments. Neither Kerry or Gore are running.
Lobo Gris
Lobo Gris-
It was mean to point out that people said the same thing when GORE ran
against BUSH in 2000 and when KERRY ran against BUSH in 2004.
A LA- "There is no difference between the two parties"
"A vote for the lesser of two evils is a vote for the evil of two lessers"
How did you not get that?
Do you really think that GORE or KERRY would have invaded IRAQ?
I know it is one issue and I agree with people when they say there is not much
of a difference but we have learned that there is a difference, and sometimes more
than we bargained for in the lesser of two evils.
I voted for NADER, although I was in CT but I am a big Kucinich fan and there
is a possibility that OBAMA will actually have a place at the table for
progressives. Although I admit most of us will be at the little kids table with
Kucinich, with plastic cutlery, but at least we will be closer to the vicinity of
the banquet.
highkarate September 14th, 2008 12:57 am
Lobo Gris-
"It was mean to point out that people said the same thing when GORE ran
against BUSH in 2000 and when KERRY ran against BUSH in 2004."
It was mean?
Lobo Gris
Sorry, I meant MEANT.
Wait, 10:26 am
Nice to hear a reasoned, common sense, view from abroad. I get so frustrated with the line: Both parties are the same---no difference between McCain and Obama... The reason half of the American electorate doesn't even bother voting is because they don't think it matters---and there's nothing the oligarchs want more than to keep the people believing this lie. They don't want us to vote! They blur the differences together. They like it that we don't take part in democracy. Just look what happened during the New Deal when the people actually got out and voted in huge numbers. They don't want that to happen again and that's why they blur the lines. Anyone who says your vote doesn't count, or there's no difference between the two candidates, so vote third party... is carrying water for the few oligarchs power. If the people ever realized what power they have as a group---then there would surely be a rebirth of American democracy.
"Just look what happened during the New Deal when the people actually got out and voted in huge numbers"
Yeah, FDR, the self-proclaimed protector of capital, tossed the working class the crumbs he was forced to by popular pressure while making sure Wall Street was protected.
A vote for Obama is a vote for oppression.
Moore in 2008.
"Of course I know that even to mention Obama's support around the world is to hurt him. Incredibly, that large Berlin crowd damaged Obama at home, branding him the "candidate of Europe" and making him seem less of a patriotic American. But what does that say about today's America, that the world's esteem is now unwanted? If Americans reject Obama, they will be sending the clearest possible message to the rest of us - and, make no mistake, we shall hear it."
What is says among other things is that the undereducated, overreligious, fearful, manipulated, so-called Red States are the
tail that is now wagging the dog. The fact that this election is even close at this point is truly pathetic after what has happened
over these last eight years. Perhaps the rest of the world ought to just accept this reality and organize themselves into a post
American world where they practice containment of American aggression as was once the case with the Soviet Union.
BUT it wouldn't be close if we had a much better stronger candidate than Obama, who wasn't parroting some of the worst policy ideas of the republican party. OBAMA is the real problem and he always has been. the primary system for the Democrats is BROKEN and needs to be fixed. They will always pick the wrong candidates with their current system in place. All I can tell you Obama lovers is that every single time I hear him speak, listen to his interviews, the more I think: he should never ever ever be President of the United States.
Unfortunately, the Republicans have proven that there is great power in deceit. If Barack Obama had no morals he would do just what the Republicans do, make mountains out of molehills or even thin air. It's all about feigning indignation. It works when it is uttered on the television news. I wonder if America will ever wake up out of its dull lethargy to even attempt to understand the psychological operations played upon it by the Republican Party. If it can't the result will be the end of the American dream because that dream consisted mostly of honor. I'm afraid that the Americans will be fooled again and, as they say, the third time is the charm. The world will understand then that it wasn't a few lone madmen on this crazed, world-dominating course but the American people themselves who will be forever known as a militarized people, a lesser breed who attempted to live by the sword as though their livelihoods were more important that the very lives of the peoples of other countries. America needs to re-discover true morality and dismiss those who would use the concept of war like just another ingredient in the kitchen. Sarah Palin may be young, but her thoughts are old. We are the same age and to espouse what she espouses is a sign that she has learned how to master the test over the material itself. There is no more room in the world for archaic thinking where a "hockey mom" can also suddenly, and just as easily, wipe people from the planet according to some Republican core belief based in fear and cynicism. It's time to move forward with our eyes looking ahead rather than back at some "conservative" utopia. You ain't going to kill your way to a Howdy Doody world.
If Sarah Palin was not properly vetted, then she is just joining the club ...
http://educate-yourself.org/cn/earlhopperinterview08feb08.shtml
http://educate-yourself.org/cn/skousenmediapromosmccain02feb08.shtml
OK. “Sarah” is not competent. Guess what? This is no revelation, even to Republicans. However, she wasn't chosen because she knew what the Bush Doctrine is, or what being able to see Russia from her back porch teaches her about what’s going on in Georgia. Far from banishing her in disgrace from public view, her “incompetence” is only managing to keep her face the dominant one in the media. And her youthful female face is the whole point. Regardless of her political background, or what that says about McCain’s judgment as a potential chief executive, Palin was chosen for her charisma and her ability to energize their base with youthful enthusiasm for the Paleolithic Republican platform. Get over this woman. If it wasn't going to be her, it would have been some other youngish, clueless Republican upstart with a slim grasp on reality but a firm grip on the party line.
Sarah Palin will only light a fire under formerly demoralized Republicans, but won’t pull many votes from the Democrats. She does threaten us among so-called “undecided” voters. And if this really is going to be as tight a race as it was in 2000 and 2004, we shouldn’t be talking about Palin, or Kerry or Gore but ... YOU KNOW WHO. He's Baaaack. And he’s not alone.
In the energy and excitement of this campaign, I more or less forgot about the third party threat. Didn’t you? In 2000 and 2004, this was a grave concern. With the 2008 race so narrowed, it is again.
Take Michigan, by Democratic Party accounts, a key battleground state. The latest poll shows that Obama has a meager 4-point lead over McCain, less than Kerry had at this point in’04.
On the other hand, Ralph Nader is on the ballot there and polls at 6 points. Ron Paul has 2 points. That’s before counting any other single digit candidates who are on the ballot. (1 point here and there but they add up) There’s Bob Barr (Libertarian), Cynthia McKinney (Green Party) and 9 others, who are on the ballots of multiple states and 5 independents who are on ballots in at least one state. See the list here: http://www.politics1.com/p2008.htm
Nader and Paul recently appeared on CNN together. Asked why they are running they said there is “no difference between the two parties” just as Nader has been insisting for years. Wolf Blitzer - who in an earlier segment said that the McCain and Obama were “world’s apart” on most issues - didn’t challenge this. In fact the media loves this. More stories, more personalities, more action!
Ron Paul, with a 35 million dollar war chest is saying vote for anyone BUT McCain or Obama.
It’s a triumph of individualism and self-absorption. There’s a deeply moral issue underlying this. When people say there is “no difference between the two parties” the question has to be asked, No difference to whom? A Katrina survivor? An Iraq Veteran? An elderly person without medical coverage? A young couple losing their house? This Planet?
There is a difference and we know it. And in a campaign where liberals are so demoralized and once again have that sinking feeling that it’s all over and there’s nothing we can do … there is something. Fight against the narcissism of the third party vote and the stay-at-home crowd. If you know anyone challenge them. Elect Obama even by a slim margin. It may not make a difference to you, but it does to someone, someone in need.
By the way, I am an ex-pat living in Europe and I am a fervent supporter of Obama; however I got to tell you the line "If the free world could choose its leader, it would be Barack Obama" is a tad over the top isn't it?
you call third parties narcissists after the glorified DNC and RNC? WTF?????? Sorry but I don't want to live in a country where I'm faced with two not very great candidates. Yes they have their differences but most of it is cosmetic and I'm not talking just about lipstick. They are not very different because they are both corporate candidates. They don't give the american people what the majority of us ask for because it isn't profitable to their corporate sponsors. This will hurt Americans more than ANYTHING. What you project is the very successful Corporate Democrat propaganda. And in that projection lies a very obvious act of political bigotry. We need to bring down the Commission on Presidential Debates that is owned by the Democratic and Republican parites so that 3rd parties have a chance. The Corporate Democrats and Republicans know what they are doing and they are using YOU to scare viable candidates like Nader away so the american people are left without a choice. We need more choices to oppose the status quo that only benefit the corporations.
What about KUCINICH? Why isn't he someone to get behind? Why not vote for OBAMA which could allow for KUCINICH to have more of a voice and then with KUCINICH
having more visibility start organizing to get him elected for 2012 and at least get
him close to a place in a cabinet position or something.
At least get behind a Sean Penn or a George Clooney or something, Viggo Mortensen or whatever, man NADER just seems unelectable at this point. I don't hate the guy but what are ya gonna do?
I guess you didn't see that Sean Penn spoke with Nader at his rally alongside the DNC - Sean Penn recognizes the importance of Ralph Nader. In order for us to get Americans to take people like Kucinich and Nader seriously we have to throw our support behind them. Ralph Nader is running now. I just don't have the kind of faith in the Democratic party to think Kucinich will become stronger under Obamas candidacy. In 4 years from now we'll all be having the same conversations. Only problem is there will be fewer people supporting 3rd party candidates and anomoly Democrats like Kucinich because no one has the guts or intelligence to get behind them. Because they get caught in the trap that they are not viable and when enough people believe that lie it becomes true. It ultimately translates to fewer voices and choices. If we don't do something now it will only get worse. We'll have fewer choices and fewer rights. That is the path we are careening towards. The only way to stop it is to support the candidate that has the best ideas for our country and that IMO means voting for 3rd party candidate Ralph Nader. Life is too short to have that kind of blind faith in the Democratic party. Especially after they've had control over the House and Senate the past two years and nothing has changed. The problem is the corporations have too much control because they decorate the wallets of politicians including Obama! Ralph Nader proposes a separation of Corporations and state. This is a good idea! I like Kucinich and supported him. I think Ralph Nader's ideas are even more provocative.
HOW IS NADER VIABLE?
An election shouldn't be about who is most electable in a rigged system but about what is right for the country.
Do you believe that a candidate that believes it is all right to spy on the American people in violation of the 4th amendment to the constitution is right for the country? A candidate that believes that it is right to give immunity to those who did so.
Do you believe that a candidate that believes that the military and the war in Afghanistan should be expanded is right for the country?
Do you believe that a candidate that said he was against the war in Iraq but voted consistently to fund it is right for the country?
Do you believe that a candidate that believes, in direct opposition to his stand as a primary candidate, that the war in Iraq should be ended only when the commanders in the field think it should is right for the country?
Do you believe that a candidate that believes that telling the electorate that NAFTA should be fixed to get the nomination but really believes that it is only overheated cmapaign rhetoric is right for the country?
Do you believe that a candidate that believes he shouldn't govern by polls, popular will, is right for the country?
Do you believe that a candidate that wants to continue and expand Bush's faith based initiative and give federal tax dollars directly to churches in violation of the separation of church and state is right for the country?
If so then Barack Obama is your candidate, but he isn't mine.
Lobo Gris
in what way? In terms of issues/solutions Ralph Nader IS the most viable candidate IMO because he is for what the majority of Americans are for. Go to his website if you don't believe me and look at the issues he puts on the table. In what way are the Dems viable other than the fact that they have a monopoly on getting access to media and snuffing 3rd parties out. Yeah that's viable but in a really shoddy way.
echoexist-
Come on now, you know very well at this point in the election, VIABLE means
electable. To say there is no difference between OBAMA AND MCCAIN is ridiculous. Are
they similar, of course, is OBAMA going to overthrow the system, of course not. I cant
stand all you armchair quarterbacks calling the shots from your computers, OBAMA will
make a difference in some significant ways, maybe not to people who have nothing to
lose but to alot of poor people and people of color, it will be a little bit better,
but that is not important to video game revolutionaries I guess. Go ask the Iraqis
and people in Guantanamo if Gore or Kerry wouldn't have been a little better.
You forget that Obama only voted against the Iraq war once - he voted for it every single time after that. You need to realize - EVERYTHING the Bush regime has done to this country for the past (almost) 8 years was done with the support and votes of the Democratic party. You can say if this and if that 'til your blue in the face but that doesn't change the voting records of the Democratic leaders who run and ruined our country and our constitution. Obama has already said he's going to expand the military budget and expand the war in Afghanistan which is an unwinnable war. So maybe you should re-think and do a little more research to find out who this Obama fellow would be a little bit better for. Because he won't be better for the Afghans. And he has said nothing about helping the poorest people in our country. And you're right maybe that isn't good enough for "video game revolutionaries" but it seems like it's definitely good enough for TV propagandist empty vessel robots set on spreading the fear of the Corporate Democratic machine.
What is with you people?
What is NADER going to do for the AFGHAN people? Take your hand of your
joystick and get a grip on reality!
Put your anger aside for one second if it is real and tell me that OBAMA
wont be a little better than MCCAIN?
I agree with everything you are saying but progressives are a little out of
touch when they say that OBAMA will be the same as MCCAIN. I just suspect that people who have that opinion do not know how important just minimal gains in the quality of life are to many people. FISA, the constitution, it is all important but with MCCAIN there is no room for improvement.
I don't trust the DEMS either but come on tell me why, in concrete terms why
voting for NADER is better that voting for OBAMA? Don't just go on and on about how bad OBAMA is. You are not going to take down this beast with your computer and some
spray paint. We need to be pragmatic and go to work.
Anyone who is organizing and not just rebelling from their laptop knows how much harder it is going to be to get stuff done under a MCCAIN/PALIN presidency.
Sorry, but OBAMA is the best we can do right now.
I couldn't have said it better than Lobo Gris. And I'd only like to add to your Joystick Generation and laptop comments. I don't really know who you are talking to because we are both having this conversation on a computer. 2nd don't assume to know me and what I'm like only because I support Nader. Let's just focus on the topic. Taking cheap shots like those only shows that you are in the school of Democratic and Republican politics. But let's also remember that the internet is one of the few places left where real democracy is still available. Of course the FISA bill that Obama voted for definitely threatens even that.
highkarate September 14th, 2008 1:17 am
"What is NADER going to do for the AFGHAN people?"
He won't expand the Afgan war which means that fewer innocent Afgan people will die. That will undoubtedly be very important to those Afganis who remain among the living.
Your next two statements say it all
"I agree with everything you are saying"
"I don't trust the DEMS either"
"Sorry, but OBAMA is the best we can do right now."
No he isn't and you admit it yourself in your above statements.
Lobo Gris
OK. I am going to simplify it now.
NADER better than OBAMA.
OBAMA better than MCCAIN.
Yes, OBAMA dissapointing.
Yes, MCCAIN could be much worse on some important issues.
NADER not electable right now, sorry too bad.
Vote for OBAMA then work towards getting more progressive issues on the table.
How is a vote for NADER going to help? You still haven't been able to answer me on this. I am really curious.
I don't mean, "How is NADER going to help the AFGHANS if he gets elected" of course it would be great for NADER to get elected, OK? GREAT. Can you see that in bold letters? I am saying how is NADER going to help the AFGHAN people when he wont hold any office?
Are you even listening? This is my last post on this.
read my comment above in response to your Kucinch comment. This is why voting for the candidate that supports your issues is important
Does it matter whether it's McCain or Obama anymore?
Both candidates represent the same thing. Obama is merely the lesser of two American hegemonic evils. Pre-flipflop, Barack Obama seemed to be the right man, but his recent sucking up to the military industrial complex/corporate elite now has me doubting his candidacy, not to mention his sincerity.
If the world has to deal with Bush the sequel, John McCain, together with his sidekick Sarah “my god can beat up your god” Palin, we can expect more of the same mindless light on brains, heavy on bombs foreign policy. Vote McCain/Palin, build a bomb shelter.
The problem with the American populace is they still believe they are the good guys. They still view themselves as the cavalry, but they are in fact viewed as the hostile invaders, the belligerent occupiers and that which must be resisted.
As I see it, the Democratic Party is a lot like a box of chocolates; you’re never sure where the nuts are - whereas the Republican Party is a lot like a chocolate fudge sundae, they tend to put the biggest nuts on top. So long Dubya, we’ll always have Guantanamo!
http://www.blogoffanddie.wordpress.com
"the mark of 'the beast' is just a bad haircut"
Yes it really matters. Both candidates are saying what they can to expand their appeal, which is why it seems the hard core on both sides is growing frustrated with their respective choices. Still the Conservatives seem to know this and are getting behind the McCain Palin ticket, whereas the Progressives are making claims like this.
But there is a difference to those who will be affected by the winners. Obviously to many progressives, it won't touch their lives directly either way.
** Important, please read thoroughly! **
To the citizens of the United States of America from Her Sovereign Majesty Queen Elizabeth II.
In light of your failure in recent years to nominate competent candidates for President of the USA and thus to govern yourselves, we hereby give notice of the revocation of your independence, effective immediately.
Her Sovereign Majesty Queen Elizabeth II will resume monarchical duties over all states, commonwealths, and territories (except Kansas, which she does not fancy).
Your new Prime Minister, Gordon Brown, will appoint a Governor for America without the need for further elections.
Congress and the Senate will be disbanded.
A questionnaire may be circulated next year to determine whether any of you noticed.
To aid in the transition to a British Crown Dependency, the following rules are introduced with immediate effect:
(You should look up 'revocation' in the Oxford English Dictionary.)
1. Then look up aluminium, and check the pronunciation guide. You will be amazed at just how wrongly you have been pronouncing it.
2. The letter 'U' will be reinstated in words such as 'colour', 'favour', 'labour' and 'neighbour.' Likewise, you will learn to spell 'doughnut' without skipping half the letters, and the suffix '-ize' will be replaced by the suffix '-ise'. Generally, you will be expected to raise your vocabulary to acceptable levels. (look up 'vocabulary').
3. Using the same twenty-seven words interspersed with filler noises such as 'like' and 'you know' is an unacceptable and inefficient form of communication. There is no such thing as US English. We will let M*crosoft know on your behalf. The M*crosoft spell-checker will be adjusted to take into account the reinstated letter 'u' and the elimination of -ize.
4. July 4th will no longer be celebrated as a holiday.
5. You will learn to resolve personal issues without using guns, lawyers, or therapists. The fact that you need so many lawyers and therapists shows that you're not quite ready to be independent. Guns should only be used for shooting grouse. If you can't sort things out without suing someone or speaking to a therapist then you're not ready to shoot grouse.
6. Therefore, you will no longer be allowed to own or carry anything more dangerous than a vegetable peeler. Although a permit will be required if you wish to carry a vegetable peeler in public.
7. All intersections will be replaced with roundabouts, and you will start driving on the left side with immediate effect. At the same time, you will go metric with immediate effect and without the benefit of conversion tables.
Both roundabouts and metrication will help you understand the British sense of humour.
8. The Former USA will adopt UK prices on petrol (which you have been calling gasoline) of roughly $10/US gallon. Get used to it.
9. You will learn to make real chips. Those things you call French fries are not real chips, and those things you insist on calling potato chips are properly called crisps. Real chips are thick cut, fried in animal fat, and dressed not with catsup but with vinegar or mayonaise.
10. The cold tasteless stuff you insist on calling beer is not actually beer at all. Henceforth, only proper British Bitter will be referred to as beer, and European brews of known and accepted provenance will be referred to as Lager. South African beer is also acceptable as they are pound for pound the greatest sporting Nation on earth and it can only be due to the beer. They are also part of British Commonwealth - see what it did for them. American brands will be referred to as Near-Frozen Gnat's Urine, so that all can be sold without risk of further confusion.
11. Hollywood will be required occasionally to cast English actors as good guys. Hollywood will also be required to cast English actors to play English characters. Watching Gywneth Paltrow attempt English dialogue in Shakespeare in Love was an experience akin to having one's ears removed with a cheese grater. (Not to forget about Amy Zellweger's attempt in Bridget Jones)
12. You will cease playing American football. There is only one kind of proper football; you call it soccer. Those of you brave enough will, in time, be allowed to play rugby (which has some similarities to American football, but does not involve stopping for a rest every twenty seconds or wearing full kevlar body Armour like a bunch of nancies). Don't try Rugby - the South Africans and Kiwis will thrash you, like they regularly thrash us.
13. Further, you will stop playing baseball. It is not reasonable to host an event called the World Series for a game which is not played outside of America. Since only 2.1% of you are aware there is a world beyond your borders, your error is understandable. You will learn cricket, and we will let you face the South Africans first to take the sting out of their deliveries.
14. You must tell us who killed JFK. It's been driving us mad.
15. An internal revenue agent (i.e. tax collector) from Her Majesty's Government will be with you shortly to ensure the acquisition of all monies due (backdated to 1776).
16. Daily Tea Time begins promptly at 4:00 pm with proper cups, with saucers, and never mugs, with high quality biscuits (cookies) and cakes; plus strawberries (with cream) when in season.
God Save the Queen!
PS:
Go ahead and share this with your friends in the US (those with a good sense of humour or humor).
________________________________________
THIS IS THE SOLUTION..........LOL
Ah, to live in a civilized society again. Maybe if we asked nice the British really would adopt us.
Funny ... but at least give author's credit here to John Cleese
Actually, it wasn't Cleese: http://www.snopes.com/politics/satire/revocation.asp
Still funny, though...
I'm bloody mad. Its time to stop being nice. Let's face it, Sarah Palin is shallow, poorly educated, intellectually dishonest and a religious bigot. She would be a disaster if called upon to fill the Oval Office. The World is anxiously waiting for American citizens to finally end the nightmare of the Bush era and if polling trends are any indication here they go again. I can only conclude that after 8 years of Bush and now the lying team of McCain and Palin, the majority of voters are incapable of making rational decisions. Like monkeys they are driven by their hormones, emotions and instincts. Here are a few of her beliefs that clearly spell out her shallowness:
* Claims The Lord is behind the Invasion of Iraq and associates Iraq with 9/11.
* She questions whether global warming is being influenced by the Human race. Now where did this poorly educated woman get the expertise to have any opinion whatsoever on this subject?
* Doesn't support the protection of endangered species when it gets in the way of drilling for oil.
* Suggest that Georgia and the Ukraine immediately join NATO and if a confrontation with Russia leads to war, so be it. A mushroom cloud looms over this one.
* She is an Evangelical Christian. Creationism, The Second Coming and all that nonsense.
* As a Canadian her domestic positions aren't my problem but I feel sorry for most Americans when the majority blindly follow the Pied Piper.
In short, what in hell motivates Americans to vote for this trashy woman? This is a nightmare scenario for America and the world.
http://www.justtryingtosortitout.blogspot.com/
What in hell motivates Americans to vote for Sarah Palin? Soooo many Americans are just politically,ignorant, sophomoric and moronic as hell!
When U$A invaded Afganistan I boycotted U$ goods. I had 2 Harley Davidson motorcycles. I now have a Suzuki. I used to eat red salmon from Alaska. I now eat local fish (if I can afford it - export to Japan inflates the local prices) or failing that fish from South Africa.
When U$A invaded Iraq boycotting U$ goods went global and was pleased to read in 2004 that sales of U$ goods around the world had been reduced by 20%.
My father drives a Jeep and a has a Dodge truck. Increases in fuel costs has encouraged him to sell them off. Nobody seems interested.
Months of media reports on U$A outside of U$A claimed masses of Americans were becoming involved in politics for the first time, soley to depose the Republicans, and support for Republicans within traditional demographic strong holds like the military and psuedo-Christian cults had almost evaporated.
Now we hear "the polls" imply the Republicans have a competitive chance of winning. So I'm inclined to suspect the reports on the polls are fairytales and the Republicans intend to run the voting machine scam again. Y'know you wouldn't have this problem if you abolished the vote rigging machines and went back to pencil & paper.
IMO Freedland's assertion that the world will punish Americans collectively if the Bush gang is re-elected through McCain/Palin, is right on the money. Because we will. So don't be surprised when people around the world refuse to buy American goods and refuse to sell to American businesses/companies simply because they are American. If the Republicans retain control of U$A, the rest of the world will financially isolate U$A and turn their backs when victims of U$A give Americans a dose of their own poison.
If Obama loses, it won't be because he's black. It won't be because of our racist history. If he loses, it's because he never had a chance. They are going to steal this election, if they can, just as they have stolen others. The people behind McPalin are all sinister Cheney-types, sickeningly determined to impose their vision of how things should be and they are going to do it. So, kick back, throw another steak on the barbie, pour some Guinness and enjoy the sunset. It's all over.
Evil wins.
Here's a comment for Freedland, the author of this column.
It chafes me to read a British writer chastizing Americans. It is my recollection that Britain supported the invasion of Iraq and that Tony Blair understood that Bush justified that war based on falsehoods and Blair (and the British people) went along with it. . . and it seems to me that many countries went along with the lies. . . . and now you want to blame Americans?! Sure, we Americans are to blame . .. but give me a fucking break. . . you Brits are just as lost as we are, just as beholding to the corporate maw and the destruction of, well, everything.
Isn't there a history of empire and domination in British history? did I read that somewhere?
I think you are being unkind to our British cousins. The majority of British (and Australian) denizens opposed Bush policies, yet Blair and Little Johnnie Howard proceeded unilaterally to support George Bush's madness. At least the citizens of both the UK and Australia have had the good sense to remove their leaders (and the Bush doctrine) from power, something Americans appear to lack the interest to achieve.
Who elected Blair and Howard? Martians?
Sadly, my friend you've missed the point of the article entirely - this isn't a Brit chastizing (sorry chastising) Americans, it's far more fundamental than that. Please go back and read the article properly and make an intelligent comment.
You're probably one of those folks who believes that Paul Revere rode through the night shouting 'the British are coming!'' - which of course he didn't as, at that moment in history, everyone was still British - thanks to Bill Bryson, who pointed this out to us all in his excellent book, 'Made in America'.
yes and in effect, we won the revolutionary war but lost the peace.
The combination of the industrial evolution and central banking system laid the foundation for the class system we now find entrenched in America. The wealthy Europeans who became the new aristocracy in America; the robber barons who have stolen the land, laid waste to the vast resources of this and all the other continents, have very little to do with any social contract with America.
Those strong hearts in Central and South America who are fighting the imperialists, are doing so for the sake of all of us. We Americans in our all to comfortable life styles have yet to feel the full impact of the empires insatiable greed but it is coming. Then and maybe only then will we understand we have more in common with the people of the world than we do with those that occupy the halls of power in this nation.
g
I feel the depression, I understand the stakes, but.....
Obama is running for president of the U.S. and not the world.
Obama has forgotten apparently what brought him this far and metamorphized into a boring candidate.
How come the facts only matter when we discuss Obama and McCain and Palin are all sizzle (packaging) and no steak (substance)?
How come, despite the life-long staying power of PTSD, McCain's prolonged torture, and McCain's notorious lack of effective anger management skills for his entire public life is not an issue?
How come a 6 year, trillion dollar, (it will be over 3 trillion before things wind down) military invasion of the middle east in violation of treaty obligations and the constitution is off the table?
How come a criminal adminstration is allowed to keep going merrily along with no accountabililty for its high crimes through the process of inmpeachment or at the very least an investigation and documentation of the more exact natrure of these transgr4essions?
Why do the very rich (top 5-10% of income earners) pay lower tax rates than the rest of us and many corporations pay none at all?
Who approved of making private for-profit corporations the gate-keepers of the rationing of health care?
When are we finally going to reduce the Pentagon budget and start closing military facilities around the world?
When do we finaly stop borrowing from at interest from the wealthy and start taxing them like everyone else for the costs of running the government?
If Barack Obama is not willing to fight for the office of the president on behalf of all who constitute "we the people of the United States", then neither he nor any of the Democratic Party office-holders deserves the votes of anybody--no matter how biracial, well-educated, charismatic, or adored by Oprah they may be.
Poet
"McCain's prolonged torture"
?Torture?
http://educate-yourself.org/cn/earlhopperinterview08feb08.shtml
http://educate-yourself.org/cn/skousenmediapromosmccain02feb08.shtml
"Obama has forgotten apparently what brought him this far and metamorphized into a boring candidate."
I don't watch TV, but don't you think it's possible that Obama's being portrayed this way by the media who has picked McPain and is skewing the coverage in their favor.
The debate's over. The duopoly must die. Vote third party progressive in all your exchange/association.
Freedland sez: "McCain wants to bypass the United Nations in favour of a US-friendly League of Democracies."
***
On what basis would the U.S. qualify for inclusion?
"On what basis would the U.S. qualify for inclusion?"
Hoo ha!
Dat wuz a gud wun!
Jacob Freeze
The world yearns for Obama and not McCain. Why could that be? Because the huge media conglomorates who control things will not let the rest of the world know that Ralph Nader and Cynthia McKinney are running for president, that they are better candidates and that they are being excluded from the presidential debates by the Democrats and Republicans.
Does the world even know these candidates are running? If so, do they know what they stand for?
Not a chance. This needs to change.
"Viagra/Vagina/Rove 08"
If Obama doesn't win this election, it will not be because the United States has rejected him; it will be because the freaking NEOCONS have stolen it yet again - WHILE AMERICA SLEPT yet again!
I have posted this comment after reading an other article on CD, but I feel it also belongs here:
"We had a dinner party the other night with friends visiting from San Francisco, US and local (Aussie) friends. We have all agreed that what the USA and the whole world needs is an other Republican government. Let me explain:
if the Democrats are allowed to win, they'll not be allowed to make significant changes, just little band-aid repairs, which will not really change anything.
Whereas should the Republicans continue, there is one certain scenario: they'll not only continue the present foreign policy, but escalate it in unknown measures (bomb Iran, bomb Pakistan, cause mayhem somewhere in Latin America, probably in parts of Africa, definitely around the borders of Russia, etc. etc).
This will help to polarize the world - AT LAST countries will take sides openly!
The US$ will nosedive, as China and the OPEC will drop it. China and the Arabs might just call in the debts as well! All the manufacturing jobs are already somewhere in the developing world, the developed world is mostly only consuming - but if the jobs dry up there will be no money to consume with. The only real manufacturing is arms and related in the US. That'll continue, of course and will get even bigger. Also, the "security" industries, private armies, mercenaries will become an even bigger business in the US - your trailer-parks and ghettoes will supply endless cannonfodder.
There'll be some big war on a global scale, which might not involve nuclear weapons. If it will not, it'll be good to clear up the world for future generations. It it will involve nukes... well..."
So let's see---here's our choice: band-aids or nuclear war. I'll take the band-aids---thanks.
To some degree I agree with this.
While it is painful to say, and far more painful to imagine, the only way this nation will ever turn around is when the American people feel the same pain their government has inflicted on the world.
Many here already have. As Howard Zinn recently said, and many Americans already know, people of color, the working poor, and now the failing middle class have all been exploited by a two party system in which there is very little difference between the two.
You want change in this nation, the radical form of change we now would require to enfranchise the people of America in a working democracy once again and turn back the forces of oppression that hold absolute control of the political process in this nation, it will take masses of people in the streets. To suggest anything less than an economic melt down and the realization of just how exposed and increasingly insecure we have become due to "the war on terror" would simply turn a blind eye to who the people of America are and what they have become.
As Franklin suggested would happen, and Jefferson echoed ominously, the spirit has changed and the people, caught up in the pursuit of money, have become careless and now are only fit to be governed by a despotism.
The straw man of impending doom should "our side" not win this election which ever side you might be on is once again partisan rhetoric designed to slap the faithful into line and deliver the intended results. It is far more important and will do far more damage if Americans continue to vote for any candidate that does not represent them because of fear. This must end and it must end now.
Obama has had every opportunity to show true leadership in the senate on energy; on civil liberties and constitutional rights; and most importantly, to address the militarism that is draining the life blood from this nation. Who here can say that he has done this?
The Democrats have had eight years and in particular the last two years to show those Americans that still believe in principle, believe in fighting for freedom and justice, that they truly stand in opposition to the criminal, thieving, murderous, greedy, self consuming monsters our government represents and they have failed at every turn. Can you honestly believe now, given that record, that somehow it will be different?
I'm sorry but I cannot. I truly want to. I am no libertarian and gods know I loath the Republican party for what can only be described as the destruction of this nation. But I am no longer a Democrat; it was they who changed not me.
So we will hold our election. Play out this little drama on the world stage and find after it is over, nothing has changed. I can only hope that with the passing days the hearts of Americans will change however; their eyes will be opened and we can once again join together to rebuild the dream that once was America.
g
interesting scenario. this goes to show people that progressives aren't afraid of who gets elected as in the end it makes no difference really. therefore, why not the rethugs over the dumborats? until we learn to say "no" to all the corporate whores who crush the proletariats and let the big whigs earn more and exploit more hardworking folks each year, then we deserve a hastening decline the likes of which will boggle the mind. seriously.
too many people are more interested in fashion and gossiping about celebrities (who make far more damn money than they deserve) that we might as well participate and help them out by electing mcbush. if someone were to put a gun to my head and force me to vote for one of the 2 corporate-run parties, i wouldn't hesitate to choose the slighty worse of 2 very evil candidates.....
You forgot the last line: "I'm John McCain and I approved this ad."