Twitter
StumbleUpon
Facebook
Delicious
Digg
Newsvine
Google
Yahoo
TechnoratiA High Price for Looking the Other Way
Retired U.S. Ambassador Charles Dunbar, speaking recently at Kent State University about the situation in Afghanistan and Pakistan, observed that "bombing civilians saves (our) soldiers' lives."
Just so: Bombing is cheaper than boots on the ground. Fairly small, safe crews can quickly dispatch numbers that it could take hundreds of ground troops days and casualties to kill.
Indeed, the Global War On Terror (GWOT) itself has been cheaper than diplomacy and treating our neighbors fairly and humanely. It's cheaper in terms of money, not least because the rich, smart and powerful can profit by financing and selling high-tech ordnance and equipment (not only to the United States and friends, but to enemies) The rich and powerful make money by brokering oil, services and mercenaries, and by selling consumer goods with infotainment of war, bombings mayhem, and torture.
The costs of the GWOT and most wars are borne by the poor, ignorant and powerless -- by poor people living in "enemy" territory who pay with their lives, by non-rich Americans, whose children serve in the Armed Forces and who pay with inadequate medical care, underfunded education, crumbling infrastructure and deregulation and privatization of basic community services.
The costs of this war are borne heavily by poor people and ecosystems in South America, Africa and Asia. Residents of our Gulf Coast have suffered "collateral damage" from storms of a planet overheating dangerously for the profit of international corporations.
The rise of terrorism should have given us a clue. Although its major manifestation in the 21st Century has been financed by the biological sport of an oil-rich Saudi family, terrorism isn't primarily a capitalistic venture or driven by profit. Efforts to link it to specific nations, corporations or organized crime have not been successful. It uses cheap materials, improvised technologies and volunteer labor. It further cheapens human life by killing only to spread fear and disorder, not for profit or power
It took the "collateral damage"
of the collapse of our financial markets based on funny-money and vast profits for their managers to wake us up to the perils we face.
To loosely paraphrase Pastor Martin Niemoller: First they came for our votes in Florida, but we didn't speak up, because we thought our votes were counted OK. Then they gave tax cuts to the rich, and sold our nation's surplus to the private sector, but we thought that was OK because they gave us some stimulus money to spend.. When they invaded Iraq and said it would keep us from being nuked, we believed that was, well, OK. When they sent young people who couldn't get jobs or afford college for repeated tours of duty in Iraq, we didn't protest -- they mostly weren't our kids. When they reduced our retirement and health care benefits and charged more for medical care, we didn't speak up, because we were OK and sick people should take responsibility for themselves. When they used torture and took away habeas corpus, most of us thought it couldn't happen to us, so it was OK.
But when they came for our mortgages and the credit we need to buy cars and college degrees and run our businesses, it was not OK. We woke up and realized that 30 years of free-market economics, doctrines of greed, shock and fear, and Command & Control decision-making have got us into a very bad place.
By the time you read this, we may have averted, at least temporarily, a massive collapse of the American economy and the U.S. dollar. But our work is just beginning. We can't keep pouring billions of dollars into the private sector to finance wars and Wall Street.
First we have to make the best choices we can for president/vice president and Congress to rebuild our nation in the great gaping hole left by the Bush administration. Then we must make it plain that we are going to take part in managing a responsible, accountable and democratic government.
A democratic government is like a strong family: people help one another, take care of the young, old and sick, accommodate differences; regulate harmful behaviors. It's where everyone works in the garden, kitchen, workshop or study and comes together at the table, sharing food and arguments, making do with what there is and deciding how to spend or invest surplus.
Democracy is when the whole family agrees on some general boundaries and values, but won't allow doctrine to drive decisions or immutable rules to govern every contingency. It's when we are confident enough in ourselves and in one another to improvise and make things up as we go along in response to the needs of the whole family and community; it's when we have elders we respect and who respect us.
Today we are necessarily a global family, facing major challenges of war/terrorism/genocide, environmental degradation, disease, and. above all, poverty.
So far, the major costs of the folly of war and market fundamentalism are being passed along to poor children: Bombing saves warriors' lives by killing poor children. War makes money for the rich at the expense of poor children's lives. Capitalism bestows wealth and power on the few, at the expense of poor children everywhere, and the young of all species on earth.
Vote carefully. Those in childhood now, and those who will be born in coming generations will pay a steep price for our follies, our economics, our wars.
101 Comments so far
Show Alljclientelle
Thanks for your reasoned and decerning posts.
As to the election, my opinion is that Obama won it at 1:22pm, Friday, October 3rd. when the House betrayed the American people by passing the shameful bill sent to them by the Senate. McCain lost at that moment. Bye, bye Amnesty John.
oops, darn i made a BIG mistake.
DO NOT PUT YOUR EMAIL ADDRESS IN ANY POST ON CD...
i did on a post yesterday and have suddenly gotten a "surge" of the usual penis enlargement and cheap pharma scam emails..along with "right leaning propaganda" crap
my bad...time to change the email address again,,lol
Sioux Rose
EZEFLYER: So right about the mysterious "deletion" of those who don't walk the party line. It's conceivable that someone/threat got to Obama once he had the nomination wrapped up.
RICH M: As always, impeccable reasoning.
VOX: Karma is a continuous process, therefore it is not always "live and in color" before our eyes (like a well-run grand jury convened for a trial); it takes cosmic time!
JCLIENTELE: I know what you mean about the complex array of good causes. Years ago when I donated regularly to several organizations, I came to realize that my name had been sold to EVERY good cause. One day I put all the envelopes on my kitchen floor that asked for donations and there were more than 70. About 6 were environmental, there were the various "save the children," some from conscious politicians, and the rest every genre of social justice. It exhausted me... and because I was not equipped to give to all those causes, I had to cut back considerably. What we need are CONCEPTS that serve mankind, beliefs that engender policies that are NOT from the school of disaster capitalism. I believe that is coming due to the scarcity of resources posed by climate change, and the new rape of the working classes to serve the banking elite. In spite of tasers and prisons and surveillance, the spirit of mankind cannot remain long in chains. There is a revolt coming, though it may occur in waves... the next few years are the trial of our souls, the denouement around 2020.
ecovoz (Oct 6 2:04 a.m.) and others who may not know exactly who voted for and against the bailout legislation, here are the votes:
House: http://clerk.house.gov/evs/2008/roll681.xml
Senate: http://www.senate.gov/legislative/LIS/roll_call_lists/roll_call_vote_cfm.cfm?congress=110&session=2&vo...
I suggest that everyone who takes to heart Caroline Arnold's injunction to "vote carefully" in the November election refrain from voting (as I expect to do) for any man or woman in the House or Senate who voted in favor of the legislation: whether in their own re-election races or whether (I'm talking McCain, Biden and Obama of course) they are running for President or Vice President.
All I can say is that I refuse to be complicit in the murderous terrorist actions of our nation. I refuse to support candidates who advocated and voted for the bailout last week. I refuse to keep going a broken corporately controlled two-party system. Call me names if you can't deal with the truth. Voting for Obama is a vote for continued insanity in foreign and economic policies.
The definition of political insanity:voting for the same duopoly election after election and expecting different results! I believe the latest bailout vote just proved my point AGAIN! Support and vote third party.
Paul R sez:
"The definition of political insanity:voting for the same duopoly election after election and expecting different results!"
The definition of political insanity:voting 3rd party election after election and expecting different results!
Vote 3rd party, Get McCain.
well spoken Remy452...EKATON, that is a brilliant(sarcasm) statement that you keep repeating on posts..NO, a nation whose currency is used worldwide & which spends 600 billion a year on its military & has 12 aircraft carriers is nowhere near 'done'...It is powerful and dangerous...I respect any progressive voting Green Party but in 2009 the next person in the 'White' House will be Obama or McCain...I feel Obama would be less likely to use those Aircraft Carriers in starting another War than former fighter pilot McCain or his Alaska Airhead running mate...btw anyone who pays taxes supports the Invasions/Occupations(bailouts,EPA,etc) not just the voters of certain politicians..
You say you "feel" that Obama would be less likely to wage war in the future than McCain, but what evidence is there to support that feeling? Obama and McCain have both voted in support of the Iraq and Afghanistan wars, both have expressed a commitment to continuing the occupation of Iraq (Obama says he might start withdrawing SOME combat troops, but not other kinds of troops, from Afghanistan in 18 months), Obama has advocated escalating the war in Afghanistan, and both advocate INCREASING the outrageous military budget. Historically, Democratic Presidents have waged war just as often as Republicans. US involvement in World War I, World War II, Korea, and Vietnam was initiated by Democratic Presidents. The world's first use of napalm as well as the only use of nuclear weapons during war was under Democrat Harry Truman. Unprovoked attacks on other countries on a smaller scale than Iraq have been engaged in frequently throughout US history regardless of which party was in the White House. The only exceptions were Gerald Ford (Republican) and Jimmy Carter (Democrat) in the immediate post-Vietnam era, but they still backed military dictatorships and coups. There is no evidence that Democratic Presidents are any less prone to violent foreign policies than Republican ones.
Every day on Common Dreams we see the same tired rehash of the anti-Obama talking points.
Obama on Iraq:
Barack Obama and Joe Biden's Plan
Judgment You Can Trust
In 2002, as the conventional thinking in Washington lined up with President Bush for war, Obama had the judgment and courage to speak out against going to war, and to warn of “an occupation of undetermined length, with undetermined costs, and undetermined consequences.” He and Joe Biden are fully committed to ending the war in Iraq as president.
A Responsible, Phased Withdrawal
Barack Obama and Joe Biden believe we must be as careful getting out of Iraq as we were careless getting in. Immediately upon taking office, Obama will give his Secretary of Defense and military commanders a new mission in Iraq: ending the war. The removal of our troops will be responsible and phased, directed by military commanders on the ground and done in consultation with the Iraqi government. Military experts believe we can safely redeploy combat brigades from Iraq at a pace of 1 to 2 brigades a month that would remove them in 16 months. That would be the summer of 2010 – more than 7 years after the war began.
Under the Obama-Biden plan, a residual force will remain in Iraq and in the region to conduct targeted counter-terrorism missions against al Qaeda in Iraq and to protect American diplomatic and civilian personnel. They will not build permanent bases in Iraq, but will continue efforts to train and support the Iraqi security forces as long as Iraqi leaders move toward political reconciliation and away from sectarianism.
Encouraging Political Accommodation
Barack Obama and Joe Biden believe that the U.S. must apply pressure on the Iraqi government to work toward real political accommodation. There is no military solution to Iraq’s political differences, but the Bush Administration’s blank check approach has failed to press Iraq’s leaders to take responsibility for their future or to substantially spend their oil revenues on their own reconstruction.
Obama and Biden's plan offers the best prospect for lasting stability in Iraq. A phased withdrawal will encourage Iraqis to take the lead in securing their own country and making political compromises, while the responsible pace of redeployment called for by the Obama-Biden plan offers more than enough time for Iraqi leaders to get their own house in order. As our forces redeploy, Obama and Biden will make sure we engage representatives from all levels of Iraqi society—in and out of government—to forge compromises on oil revenue sharing, the equitable provision of services, federalism, the status of disputed territories, new elections, aid to displaced Iraqis, and the reform of Iraqi security forces.
More at:
http://origin.barackobama.com/issues/iraq/
The United States? Stick a fork in its ass and turn it over. Its done.
-- EKATON --
I will no longer "look the other way!" I have had enough, enough of believing that the Democrats are somehow going to stand up and fight for our rights. I am sorely disappointed in Obama and his machinations to get those that voted NO to vote Yes for the bailout. Is there a list of who voted Yes for the Bailout? So if anyone can help me out, I would greatly appreciate it. If I could get my grubby little hands on that info, I will make sure that I will not vote for any of them. We need to circulate the names of those that betrayed us and vote them out of office. If you're from the Bay, get Pelosi the f*** out of there! WE need to send out a strong message in November, we will not stand for a blatant betrayal of the people!!
I just LOVE this heading: A high price for looking the other way. God, that just says it all doesn't it. Don't be pro-active, just look the other way. When shit happens, we huddle, figure out how we can best capitolize on the the freekin mess and make out like bandits. Har de har har har! How many times has this happened in the past 4 years? Well...it JUST happened with the banking crisis. Hell...Bu$h has been saying all along that the economy was just peachy keen. I knew it wasn't. You knew it wasn't. But he kept saying it. Scum bags.
"All our lives we fought against exalting the individual, against the elevation of the single person, and long ago we were over and done with the business of a hero, and here it comes up again: the glorification of one personality. This is not good at all. I am just like everybody else." -
Freedom in capitalist society always remains about the same as it was in ancient Greek republics: Freedom for slave owners.
-- Vladimir Ilyich Lenin
Hope has two beautiful daughters. Their names are anger and courage; anger at the way things are, and courage to see that they do not remain the way they are
have any of you wondered why rightwing persons are un-able/willing to change their views, despite facts and mountains of evidence proving them dead wrong?
if so then i suggest reading "The Authoritarians" by Bob Altemeyer
http://members.shaw.ca/jeanaltemeyer/drbob/Introduction_links.pdf
this is a good read very enlightening, as the author has a nice crisp and humourous style..
enjoy the enlightenment..
herb@jdz.ca
WAKEUPCALL October 5th, 2008 2:23 pm:
“[McCain] at least he believes in Global Warming & campaign finance reform”
Are you talking about the same person that successfully abused the system to use the potential for public funds to finagle a loan for his campaign, then after getting said loan, said that he wasn't going to use public funds?
All this talk about change is making me sick to my stomach. On January 20, 2009, we are going to have change. The name on the mailbox at 1600 Pennsylvania will change from George W. Bush to someone else. Simply promising change isn't good enough. We've been having the same change every four or eight years since I was born in 1969. That isn't and never will be good enough! I want improvement! I want a government that will actually listen and do the will of the masses. I want a government that will go after white collar criminals with at least the same gusto that it goes after small time drug dealers, instead of accepting their bribes, I mean campaign contributions, and looking the other way or turning around and handing them a huge return on their “investment” in the form of a “bailout”. I want to get up in the morning and go to a job, secure in the notion that if something happens to me I will be taken care of instead of having to fend for myself and let an injury turn into a debilitating disability later on. I want a foreign policy that actually cares for people of all nationalities and colors, not just for the profits of some rich, old white men.
Right now we have none of that. And come January 20, 2009, I expect we will continue with the same old same-old that has been going on since I was born and before. But I will not vote for either of those corporate-anointed blowhards, neither of whom cares one bit about the masses because we're not able to instantly pony up a check for the maximum allowable bribe, I mean campaign contribution. You can say 'til you're blue in the face (or in the fingers from typing) that I am wasting my vote on Cynthia McKinney, but I have to live with myself and I couldn't and wouldn't if by voting for either McCain or Obama I helped put them in office. A vote for a person, mainstream or third party is a vote for that person; not a waste, not a vote for someone else because it is leeching votes from the other. The two mainstream candidates I find repugnant and this nearly trillion dollar giveaway, I mean “bailout”, is just one of many reasons why.
What you said!
Two aspects of the two-party system not discussed here:
1. Its impact at the local and state level, and
2. Proportional representation as a stage from which to develop any alternative at all.
-30-
When I was with the Greens we pushed for proportional representation...to no avail. The powers that be want no part of it.
I think this will have to be a popular demand, either by wit or by force. I wonder if we could get organizations like MoveOn.org as levers to force this. Yeah, MoveOn.org is not as pure as the driven snow, but they are a force to be reckoned with.
I know one thing: Not one single solitary change will come from flapping our gums on Common Dreams. It's a great place to dream and discuss, but change comes once our asses separate from our chairs and we move our feet. Oh, and use our brains.
With the benefit of the lessons of our history we are destined to repeat many otherwise preventable policy mistakes because we believe ourselves to be exceptional.” – Dr. Robert
Market fundamentalists ARE the government.
We wish Obama were more like Nader and Kucinich. But Nader and Kucinich are allowed to live only because one takes votes away from Democrats and the other is there to give us the illusion of an opposition, though neither is taken seriously by the MSM.
The corporate fascist, disaster capitalists have killed and impoverished millions here and abroad and will continue to do so in their endless war profiteering.
Doesn't it seem strange that any serious opposition tends to die in plane crashes or disappears from the news media?
The neocons would finish Obama in a heartbeat in a thousand mysterious ways if he began to sound like Nader and Kucinich.
If Obama strays too far from conservative opinions, he is a dead man, in office or out.
As Obama's poll numbers rise, so does the chance of an invasion of, or an Israeli attack on Iran that we must enter into, a broadened war in Afghanistan, a (another?) trumped up terrorist attack on our soil, cancelation of the elections and martial law.
Whoever hasn't read "The Shock Doctrine", should. The truth makes fiction seem lame by comparison.
"The neocons would finish Obama in a heartbeat in a thousand mysterious ways if he began to sound like Nader and Kucinich."
___________________________________
I think this is worded exactly right-- but how many readers made the fallacious assumption that "neocon" is a synonym for "Republican"?
The neocons are Republicans and Right Libertarians. I assume you meant to imply that conservative Dems are neocons too.
"If you can't lick 'em join 'em" Dems like the Clintons, Zionist Dems and Big Money Dems could fit the neocon mold. But I don't see them as the Milton Friedman apostles and war profiteers from the ruling right wing M/I/I complex who started this ongoing tragic mess. I see them as simple opportunist accomplices (though they would certainly prefer being called "pragmatists") with large stock portfolios in the military industries who are making a killing, in more ways than one.
The Neo-Cons are BOTH partys. They play good-cop/bad-cop to FOOL many many people. You just gotta ask yourself a couple of hard questions and not be too scared of the answer. Such as: Why did Kerry, after getting 15,000 lawyers lined up to do battle over the election, give in the VERY next morning? I have NEVER heard an answer from THAT one. Anyone? I hear a big vaccuum following this post. Please enlighten me.
How the hell is anyone else supposed to know? Youre the one who knows that he had "15,000 lawyers". Are you sure it wasnt 14,999?
And, it wasnt exactly the "next morning" , unless you call 3:00 AM, the next morning.
It's NEO-Confidence men ( like in the RICO laws )
____ [ neo-CONNERs ] ____
Not Neo-Conservatives
Namaste
Agreed.
No matter how I look at this situation - our situation - I just can't see any other solution other than a popular one. An electoral solution is no longer possible, if it ever was.
No one who speaks unvarnished truth can win any high office. And those who do speak it are marginalized...or worse. We've seen this too many times.
Time to try a new tack - our own.
I would rather climb the ladder one rung at a time instead of being forced to choose between descending eight rungs and jumping off the thing altogether.
At some point, policy must matter.
The "ladder" in this context is far more like the greased pole used in competitions that remain a vast source of amusement to simple folk at fairs, carnivals, and festivals around the world.
The ferocious effort keeps the climber busy, and the onlookers completely absorbed and distracted; naturally, it's a field day for pickpockets.
.One might think so. But for far too many it is simply a popularity contest and limited to two choices, Elephant or Ass, so sad for all of us.
We see things, not as they are, but as we are.
Anais Nin
I would also rather climb the ladder one rung at a time, instead of going farther into the pit the leader now has dug for us.
Regardless of the possible safety of an illusionary LADDER
___ "when one finds oneself in a H O L E,
___ the first thing to do is to
___ S T O P _ D I G G I N G "
Namaste
It seems that the game of future telling does little to change our fate. It is the old joke about how the stock market has predicted 9 of the last 5 recessions.
Nader, Barr & Paul are not going to be elected, period. We know with 100% probability that the Republican or the Democrat's candidate this year shall become the president of the US of A on January 20th at noon in 2009.
Enough is enough. Smart talk and dreamy rhetoric will keep us writing here but will change nothing if we do not organize our neighbors to get out and demand universal health care, education, middle class wages for all workers, and time to spend with our families, friends and neighbors enjoying the fruits of our labor.
I'm making a choice to vote for Obama because he is the better choice and after this election and he is elected I will be working to make sure that we demand that he do, not what he said he would do, but rather what we need him to do. That is my yes we can message. We need to realize that the power to change our world is in our hands if we get out into the streets with our friends, families, and neighbors and demand that we are heard and satisfied. – Remy Germain
"Change will not come if we wait for some other person or if we wait for some other time. We are the ones we've been waiting for. We are the change that we seek." - June Jordan
Remy Germain October 5th, 2008 4:52 pm
"I'm making a choice to vote for Obama because he is the better choice and after this election and he is elected I will be working to make sure that we demand that he do, not what he said he would do, but rather what we need him to do. That is my yes we can message. We need to realize that the power to change our world is in our hands if we get out into the streets with our friends, families, and neighbors and demand that we are heard and satisfied. – Remy Germain"
The event that best predicts how our "elected" officials will act is the recent passage of the Wall Street bailout bill.
Not only did Obama vote for it with e-mails, petitions, and phone calls running 100 to 1 against it's passage with only 4 weeks to the election, he actively campaigned for its passage. He basically said f#ck you, I will do what I want and you will still vote for me because there is no alternative. If you believe that then you should vote for him, but with no illusions that you will change him after he is elected. The only power the people hold is their vote, once you take that away by voting for a candidate in the face of incontrovertible evidence that he will do as he says rather than as the people want then they have no longer have any power at all. Any rationalizations to the contrary are just "dreamy rhetoric".
Lobo Gris
You apparently trust the medical establishment, why you want hellth care from the gov. Bad idea. I heal my own compound fractures. I know nutrition and disease dissolution well enough to not have to worry about going to doctors. Only time I goto a doctor is when I feel a need to look at my bones. Some tips for those who care to figure out quality self health care - mild h2o2 bathing, iodine is nontoxic unless you haven't had it in a very long time, then you just need to start slow, bentonite clay, food grade diatomaceous Earth, turpentine, vinegar, cleaning your a$$, are all integral to long super wellness. Eye boogers are not normal, nose boogers are not normal, funky pits are not normal, smelly feet are not normal, your genitals should be smooth and the same color as all the rest of you. Otherwise you have some cleaning to do.
Education? That's what this here ole internet is for eee. Read the dictionary and find what you need or would like to know online, keep up to date on current events, you'll get 10,000,000 times smarter than eating up what the government approves of your knowing.
Wages? Get off of the corporate dole. If you're on it, save up, establish your own business. Figure out how to buy and sell something well enough that you can support yourself on your profits. Tax shelter by nonprofit, provide low cost whatever, state the porpose of your 501c3 as to expand access to whatever your chosen service or product.
I sure don't depend on the government as any part toward enjoying time with my friends and family.
Obama? More of the fricken same skullduggery, treachery and treason is sure to follow the election of this Agent of the US Federal Government, Barrack Hussein Obama. If you want that on your head, vote Obama.
If I were going to select the President I'd vote McKinney for sure. I see not an ounce of mendacity in her. She's the only 2001 congress person who vocally questioned the Administrations obvious bubbling crap of a story about the events of September 11th 2001. Exactly as the federal hitmen do when challenged she shortly suffered electoral failure, police harassment, media demonization...
Can that be said of Barr, Paul or Nader? Nader, designed electoral failure for the presidency time and again. Never occurred to him to run for anything but the top job as a dog and pony show of a spoiler. How'd the dems let it happen so much and when it meant so much?
rocyahsoul@yahoo.com
www.lamegame.name
Daniel Vincent Kelley
.You seem unaware that many nations have cradle to grave health care provided by governments. The care they rteceive is excellent and inexpensive as well.....I would urge you to read moreon this subject, though I commiserate with what is obvioulsy a bad experience on your part.
.
We see things, not as they are, but as we are.
Anais Nin
Let's not forget that Democrats got the US involved in more wars than Republicans in the 20th century: WW1, WW2, Korea, Vietnam and several others.
Read Naomi Klein's brilliant article Beware the Chicago boys and you'll see that Obama is just another corrupt Democrat candidate whose primary goal right after taking office will be to stab the poor in the back. Jason Furman, one of Wal-Mart's most vociferous goons, heads Obama's economic team
Democrats love Naomi Klein when she's exposing Bush but ignore her when she's exposing Democrats for what they really are: criminal Wall Street prostitutes, Republican clones.
The same with poor Cindy Sheehan. She was used, abused and exploited by Dems until she had the audacity to expose them for being the Bush co-conspirators that they are. Now she can't even get Dem whore Randi Rhodes on the phone anymore.
Now Randi Rhodes isn't left wing pure enough for you? LOL!!!
.Once again your demonstrate no ability at nuance, no depth in your posts and probably in your political opinions as well.
I wonder what you think you accomplish with such silly stuff, proving that you are rather immature and unaware?
In a thread that shows much intellectual profundity, a lot of thought on both sides of this debate, and posts crafted with care and politeness you stand out like an attention seeking five year old...congratulations.
.
We see things, not as they are, but as we are.
Anais Nin
ardee the pit vole -
Once again your demonstrate no ability at nuance, no depth in your posts and probably in your political opinions as well.
I wonder what you think you accomplish with such silly stuff, proving that you are rather immature and unaware?
In almost every thread you stand out like an attention seeking five year old...congratulations.
.
We see things, not as they are, but as we are.
Anais Nin
Obama is NOT just another corrupt democrat.
He's judicial watches 8th most corrupt politician in the beltway for 2007. Credit where credit is due. If only they knew he is employed by a spy agency, they might have given him the top slot.
rocyahsoul@yahoo.com
www.lamegame.name
Daniel Vincent Kelley
Seek immediate therapy. Recovery can be possible once you have come to recognize your delusions are just delusions. In time life can be better for you. We wish you all the best in your recovery.
rocyasoul sez:
"He's [Obama's] judicial watches 8th most corrupt politician in the beltway for 2007."
Media Transparency says:
"Judicial Watch is essentially a tool of Richard Mellon Scaife, who provides almost all its funding."
http://www.mediatransparency.org/recipientgrants.php?recipientID=1122
Who is Richard Mellon Scaife?
"Richard Mellon Scaife (born July 3, 1932) is an American billionaire and newspaper publisher.
Scaife owns and publishes the Pittsburgh Tribune-Review. With $1.2 billion, Scaife, a principal heir to the Mellon banking, oil, and aluminum fortune, is No. 283 on the 2005 Forbes 400.
Scaife is particularly well known for his financial support of conservative public policy organizations over the past two decades. Scaife has provided support for conservative and libertarian causes in the U.S., mostly through the private, nonprofit foundations he controls: the Sarah Scaife Foundation, Carthage Foundation, and Allegheny Foundation, and until 2001 the Scaife Family Foundation, now controlled by his daughter Jennie and son David.[1][2] Scaife also helped fund the Arkansas Project, which ultimately led to the impeachment proceedings of President Bill Clinton."
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Richard_Mellon_Scaife
Seek immediate therapy. Recovery can be possible once you have come to recognize your delusions are just delusions. In time life can be better for you. We wish you all the best in your recovery.
ouh what a whippy snap, what'd we just graduate to middle school?
What's your point? Anyone who knows a bit of history needs to be on psychiatric drugs? The CIA agrees wholeheartedly.
rocyahsoul@yahoo.com
www.lamegame.name
Daniel Vincent Kelley
Seek immediate therapy. Recovery can be possible once you have come to recognize your delusions are just delusions. In time life can be better for you. We wish you all the best in your recovery.
There are several basic reasons why the Democrats are so incredibly disgusting, despite their unearned reputation as "the party of the common man."
One reason is that their social role is intrinsically two-faced. The Republicans are the party of warmongers, rednecks, religious fanatics, & financiers -- and at least they don't make any bones about it. Even though they lie every time they move their lips, they are at least "honest" about who they are, in the sense that even some sects of murderous gangsters have a certain code of honor.
The Democrats, on the other hand, are also a party of warmongers & financiers. But to play their phony role as "the party of the common man," they're obliged to pretend to have these concerns for working people that they really don't have. So they don't even have a minimal "code of honor" about who they are, that more candid sects of gangsters have. It's kind of a double layer of duplicity.
The other hideous thing about Democrats is their role as the "Left Boundary" of officially-permitted opinion. This role allows anyone to the left of Democrats to be labeled as "Far Left," and thus marginalized. When combined with the fact that Dems are also a party of warmongers & financiers, this effectively makes anyone opposed to constant war and/or rule by Wall Street a "Far Left extremist" in US society.
The Dem Party, therefore, is a kind of social instrument for forcing even people who are antiwar, and who have compassion for the poor, to support the policies of warmongers & financiers.
B-b-b-b-but they passed the Civil Rights Act and the Voting Rights Act more than 40 years ago!
Then they were the white people's party of racism in the deep south. Their purpose then was to secure a government role in what was happening naturally, college people of many races begining to embrace each other as African Americans pressed their way into formerly segregationist schools. White kids being exposed to black kids then at an age early enough to promote unity. The people won it with protest, the government corrupted it with bureaucracy based on phony principles stolen from the people's demands; while the operation of the bureaucracies was counter anyone's best interest.
rocyahsoul@yahoo.com
www.lamegame.name
Daniel Vincent Kelley
Gosh, I never knew that, except that I did.
Saying they're going to solve the problem is how the government gets the money to make the problem as bad as they need it to enforce subjugation.
rocyahsoul@yahoo.com
www.lamegame.name
Daniel Vincent Kelley
It seems the the Republican party is home to you.
"With the benefit of the lessons of our history we are destined to repeat many otherwise preventable policy mistakes because we believe ourselves to be exceptional.” – Dr. Zimmerman Robert
"..It seems the the Republican party is home to you..."
- Truly an imbecilic remark -- exactly at the level of Republicans claiming that Democrats are less "patriotic" than they are.
Actually, the Dem Party is far more Republican than I am. The RP has no greater ally than the DP, which collaborates with it on everything from war to Wall St bailouts, and defends it against impeachment.
“It seems that the vast majority of comments on Common Dreams are Republicans pretending to be Liberals or Progressives supporting third party candidates. There are, however, a few down right scary characters that bend toward very violent right wing ideologies. Thoughtful dialog is missing because of this phenomenon.” – Dr. Robert
What you are witnessing is a huge shift to the left. Bush did one thing. He demonstrated what capitalism and cronyism taken to the extreme would look like. He showed us what greed would do, and he was willing to sell our planet off to make a buck. It became increasingly clear that both parties do the same thing. Democrats just do the same greed business but to a lesser degree. I really got disgusted with Democrats when Pelosi bent over backwards again and again even in the face of vast constituent anger to satisfy greedy corrupt Bush. The only people not preaching about war, handing billions to billionaires were third party people. I truly enjoyed McKinney's response to Obama about the war in Afghanistan. We don't need to be there. We don't need to be killing people. Our military needs to be taken down, and the military industrial complex needs to be retooled to make green products.
It seems party loyalty has become more important than loyalty to your country. Our elections every 4 years look like the Superbowl. On one side Republicans root for their team, on the other, Democrats root for theirs. Cheerleaders on MSM and the internet blogs provide additional entertainment. Late in a close game, a Hail Mary pass gets thrown (October surprise) by the losing side.
My family are devout Republicans, flag waving patriots. They were anxious for the bail out bill to be passed. I said, WTF, are you guys insane? Why? They said so long it was not passed it served to keep peoples focus on the Economy, which hurts McCain, whom they don't like much, but they love Palin. They figure people will forget all about it next month, and they are right.
Me, I am an American first, despite our warts. At one time I considered myself a Republican, and then jumped ship after Bush became the Decider and looked forward to my new life as a Democrat, the people seemed brighter and recognized the bad things Bush was doing. That did not last long when it became apparent that on the major issues (war, terror, corporate welfare, globalization), they are both aligned, and Democrats have a million excuses for why their guys vote for the same toxic legislation. In other words, it's ok so long as they are doing it.
A vote for either party is a vote against America. Vote out all incumbents, and vote for a 3rd party. A vote for the lesser evil is still a vote for evil.
But as they say, if elections could bring about change, our elite would never allow them, and most Americans are happy with their choice of President, so do not worry, the system is safe. It is a good thing we have built up a great security system to keep us all safe from the scary characters.
The 2 party system has become almost like a religous institution that runs our government. Criticize the religion and you get labelled a heretic (anarchist). Galileo was a scary dude to the Catholic Church.
Vote 3rd party, get McCain.
MiMiCcS October 6th, 2008 4:46 am
"My family are devout Republicans, flag waving patriots. They were anxious for the bail out bill to be passed. I said, WTF, are you guys insane? Why? They said so long it was not passed it served to keep peoples focus on the Economy, which hurts McCain, whom they don't like much, but they love Palin. They figure people will forget all about it next month, and they are right."
I think that depends on whether or not the economy continues to get worse. In my opinion it will, despite or maybe even because of the bailout bill and that will keep it in the forefront of the minds of the general electorate who will suffer disproportionately.
Lobo Gris
R I C H _ M,
Very well and suciently stated. Thank you.
Your words demonstrably clarify the
___ purposefully muddled
___ meandering American mind-trap.
We are either going to have to wait for more desperate and disparate reactions of the masses of American people ( for greater degrees of motivation ), or perhaps
___ ¿ Electro-convulsive shock therapy may provide remediation ?
to either those opposed to the collective illusion of deMOCKERYcy ( to allow them to ignore better ),
___ or ___
to those willing to be re-JUMP-started into a participatory democracy
Namaste
I am really sick of this crap, too.
I am a member of SP-USA (Socislists), and sought info. from CP-USA. I was very surprised to find that they wer supporting Obama. (SP is not)When I disagreed, I started getting , well, threatening letters from the guy who had been so "friendly" on the phone.
His last email was :"You are either with labor, children, the elderly, the poor, the unions, etc....or you are with the corporate state and McCain".
That is absolutely fucking ridiculous. Why even BE in another party , if you cant even criticize the Dems? Why not just be a Dem? Why question at all? I am sick to death of voting for the sold out Dems.
The time to "get into the streets" , sheeples, is NOW. NOT after someone has secured office. I wish you guys would just say. "Ok. So Obama is not progressive at all. He's just better than Mccain. You have to make you own decision." Sometimes people actually do, but then, it quickly follows, all the things we will be directly responsible for,. if we do not cast our one (probalby uncounted ) vote for Obama. Talk about fear-mongering. He is so far ahead now, why dont you back off?
It is uncalled for, inappropriate and wins elections for NO ONE! What exactly is you r "strategy" here?? Does Obama know about it? Cause it sure as hell isnt helping him!
The socialists are not running anyone for president this time are they? I know on the Communist Party USA they are supporting Obama. Crazy, isn't it?
No offense, but what are Socislists? LMAO!
Party of the wokrers?
sp-usa.org
People like Randi Rhodes (who I used to admire so much) did not help the cause of the "progressives" wanting to vote for neo-liberal Obama at all. Peopple dont like having choices shoved down their throats. Obama supporters might deny it, but it is actually very painful for someone who has "waited and waited" for the Dems to do the right thing.
I'm not sure the DNC has fully grasped the situation. McCain wil lose , because he is Bush's conjoined twin now. But, that doesnt necessarily translate into broad progressive support for Obama.
The DNC has left me high and dry ,for the last time, folks.
Randi Rhodes is a Dem Party hack, no credibility. She made sure to have Nader on, on her first day on Air America, just so she could humiliate him. Nader was the one who ended up humiliating the media whore and hung up on her face.
She spent this entire past week trashing the bailout but changed the subject quick when her pimp Obama came out in full force for it.
This article typifies the well-intentioned liberal, who recognizes the more obvious part of the truth, but is adamantly in denial about the rest of it. Consequently, the article is riddled with self-contradiction.
For instance, Ms Arnold rightly says, "We can't keep pouring billions of dollars into the private sector to finance wars and Wall Street.....War makes money for the rich at the expense of poor children's lives. Capitalism bestows wealth and power on the few, at the expense of poor children everywhere..."
But in the next breath she says, "First we have to make the best choices we can for president/vice president and Congress to rebuild our nation in the great gaping hole left by the Bush administration.....Vote carefully."
These 2 sets of ideas are completely incompatible -- a perfect example of Orwellian "doublethink." The election is between 2 parties that both fully support constant US war-making, and US capitalism -- in other words, "war and Wall Street." So if you oppose immoral US wars, or you oppose domination by the capitalist elite, you have no one to vote for. (Your "choice" is between "terrible" and "more terrible.")
But like all liberals, Ms Arnold doesn't want to face this unsettling thought. So she's left to console herself with shallow but comforting prettyisms. It's ironic that she titles her article, "A High Price for Looking the Other Way," because she herself is looking the other way, when it comes to facing up to this absolutely fundamental contradiction.
RichM - There is no obvious action-recipe that follows from the fact that the two parties are both militaristic and serving high finance, "the capitalist elite" as you correctly say. This is not such a new or particularly astute observation, although I admit it has gotten much worse in the last two decades.
The problem is that we have not built up a viable alternative. The electoral choice today is between voting for the most unsatisfactory Obama or the completely impossible Nader or McKinney. What's the "denial" part about that?
We must do some organizing. No immediate solution for this time around.
Joe
"...This is not such a new or particularly astute observation.."
- It's not at all new, but it IS "astute." Or let's say, to choose better words, it's relevant, important, & non-obvious. Most supporters of Democrats don't know it, or are in denial about it. It's an impediment to progress that so many people still have such childish illusions about who the Democrats really are.
"...The electoral choice today is between voting for the most unsatisfactory Obama or the completely impossible Nader or McKinney. What's the "denial" part about that?.."
- First of all, I didn't say that that particular point was the thing that was being "denied." Liberals are in denial about certain truths, but not about others. I said explicitly that Ms Arnold, in her article, saw the more obvious truths, but was in denial about others.
Second, the most dangerous thing about pre-election social pressure aimed at pushing people to vote for the lesser evil, is not the vote itself. Rather, it's the general mentality that's encouraged. It's far more destructive to vote for Obama under the illusion that he's some sort of antiwar guy or anti-Wall Street guy, than it is to merely vote for him, while having no silly illusions about him (or propagating these illusions to others).
Another dangerous delusion that goes along with voting for Obama is the idea that then, "progressives would have a seat at the table," or that we'd be able to "hold his feet to the fire." All that stuff is pure BS.
I can respect someone who says, "I'll vote for Obama -- but I despise him and his whole stinking party. I expect virtually no meaningful change, with him in office. And I'm going to vote for him only to buy us all a little time, so we can figure out a way to do away with both of these criminal parties altogether."
As far as voting goes -- I think everyone in a state where polls show that the state will definitely go to the D's or the R's, should vote 3rd party. Only if you're in a so-called "battleground state," is it reasonable to vote for the "lesser evil." And if one chooses to vote for Obama, one should do it without having any illusions in him. One should still recognize the necessity of ultimately bringing down the 2-party tyranny.
Let me understand this. A nation with a consistent history of stupid decisions, piggish consumerism and callous insensitivity to the death and suffering of others has finally come to its senses because we can't get a loan to buy a second car. The pain has transformed our character. We're going to vote carefully (for democrats one supposes) and learn from our mistakes and stop bombing children and exploiting the poor.
We are not going to pay the price for the hundreds of thousands of people we have annihilated or the cultures we have trashed or the resources we have robbed. That economic scare has got us turning over a new leaf. Suddenly we're nice guys and no longer a pack of murdering thieves. Honest, judge, we've found Jesus. Its going to be all right from now on.
If we're going to get all interested in our own redemption I think we ought to start with Charles Manson. He's learned his lesson. We should let him go, dust him off, buy him a new suit and give him another chance.
This is a silly article. We might pull out of this crisis, but if we do we'll revert right back to the same predatory behavior that we started with. Or we might, if karmic inevitability really is a law, find ourselves relocated somewhere down the food chain, making baskets to sell in Chinese supermarkets. But even the long overdue experience of receiving the pain we have inflicted on others is not going to magically turn us into intelligent, compassionate, beautiful people. There is no historical precedent for it.
You have to start somewhere, no? Btw, what do you intend to do as a process for change?
Force the acceptance of more than two parties in the uS.
That is a good point, except for the forced part. Anyway, you have my vote.
If need be, I should add.
Well put.
Excellent comment, vox. I especially like the "giving Charlie Manson another chance" point. Touché!
The Chicago School of Economics and Witchcraft strikes again.
This is what I have been saying (although I am an agnostic).
It is (not) amazing to me , that it takes "hitting the rich" and MONEY to actually get the Am. people on their feet. I protested alot of this stuff. But it was lonely out the, I gotta tell ya.
I realize that alot of these things happened after a big "shock". But, disasters like Hurrican Katrina, etc.,while not preceipated by Bush et al, were, nonetheless, made worse by thier non-internvetion.
It is the Shock Doctrine, and we must do everything we can do to stop it.
All that is required for evil to triumph is for good men to do nothing.
The poor will take the biggest hit, but, all both candidates can talk about is the "middle class". Well, there are fewer and fewer of them.
Where do you see her recommending Obama? She points out that the last 30 years have seen worsening conditions for the poor and working class. That includes 10 years of Democratic presidencies.
I think when she says to vote carefully, she means vote Green. Vote for Cynthia McKinney.
She couldn't possibly mean Obama. He has no intention of treating everyone on Earth as part of the family.
wagelaborer sez:
"I think when she says to vote carefully, she means vote Green. Vote for Cynthia McKinney."
I'm sure everyone is convinced that voting carefully will result in the selection of the person they're supporting.
So, of course, she meant you should vote for Obama. :-)
See, this is the problem - we see and hear what we want.
"First we have to make the best choices we can for president/vice president and Congress to rebuild our nation in the great gaping hole left by the Bush administration. Then [we must make it plain that we are going to take part] in managing a responsible, accountable and democratic government." (brackets mine)
She is saying, and what most choose not to see, is that it is OUR responsibility, not those of politicians or bankers or anyone else. If this is supposed to resemble anything remotely like a democracy (democratic republic), then it WE who must work. Voting is just the first step. Hell, voting is just the act of putting our shoes on. It's up to us to do the walking.
This is very true.
But, it seems to me that that is the Obama paradox.
I hear peole say all the time, "I just know in my heart that he will..." or "He is progresive to the core, he';s just hiding it to...".
This is just filling up the holes of what you dont know about a perosn with your own wishes. I hope that Obama will surprise me.
Well, I really haven't heard too many people who think that Obama is THE answer. When I do, I take some sheen off their sparkle by reminding them that the Democratic Party is as corporate as the Reps, and Obama isn't going to change that.
I guess this just comes down to strategies. I've tried the voting my conscience strategy and while I felt cleaner, it didn't help most of my causes.
I really don't know - other than playing the best hand I've been dealt then working my ass off for the world I want to see - what else to do.
P.S. I hope Obama surprises all of us...but I'm not going to sit on my couch, as many Americans will, and hope for it.
Oh brother! For all of you who are complicit in the murders of millions of LIVES in this idiotic war on terror, resource "wars" (occupations) to feed our fossil fuel dependency, our valuing our soldiers' lives and not civilians lives "over there" - people we do not know... Anyone who supports Obama is COMPLICIT and is an accessory to murder. Vote for Nader or McKinney; vote for peace.
.While intellectually I believe you to be spot on I think you just cost Nader a few votes....;-)
.
We see things, not as they are, but as we are.
Anais Nin
I don't see why, then, you would address my posts if you believe me to be complicit in murder because of my vote for Obama. Others accused me of the same for voting for Nader in 2000.
This is the kind of juvenile stuff that paints progressives as the same as right-wing yahoos. I really have to question the intent of someone who would post shit like that.
This really helps. Thanks so much.
Good article. Ralph needs to dropout to help Cynthia/Greens, Ron Paul(no please), & Dennis supports Obama(WAKE UP AMERICA!) I figure McCain is 10% better than Bush Jr. (at least he believes in Global Warming & campaign finance reform) Of course Palin would be even worse than Jr..
Obama would at least end one 'War'(occupation)& progressives could raise hell about getting out of Afganistan too..give health care to 18 million children & at least there would be someone with intelligence in the worlds most powerful office(much less likely to start another War than McCain) The World does not want another Republican President & neither do I.
Where in the world do you get that Obama "would at least end one 'War'(occupation)"? He has said he would try to REDUCE the number of COMBAT troops in Iraq STARTING IN A YEAR AND A HALF. There will still be mercenaries as well as both noncombat and combat troops in Iraq for years to come if Obama has his way. He has not made any commitment to end the US occupation of Iraq, and don't hold your breath waiting for him to. He has also said he plans to escalate the war in Afghanistan, and to increase the insane US military budget.
As they showed in convincing fashion Friday, Obama and the majority of Democratic federal politicians work for corporate America, not (except nominally) for the general public.
Ralph Nader, Cynthia Mckinney, Ron Paul, Dennis Kucinich, and independents of the like warned of this all along. If the author, however, thinks that Obama will change the way the US looks the other way, I'm afraid she's wrong. Mccain and Obama will both continue tax cuts for the wealthy/corporate elite and the wars to keep Main Street ignorant as long as possible. It is only when the wealthy and corporate elite find these wars costing more than they'll profit from it that they'll stop. We lower,middle, and working class citizens here in America and around the world must unite and stand up to the wealthy/corporate elite and force them to pay up so that they can feel the pain as they are forced into the poor house. UNITED WE STAND, DIVIDED WE FALL !