EMAIL SIGN UP!
Most Popular This Week
- Wisconsin Bill Would Treat Organic Milk, Sharp Cheddar, Brown Eggs as "Junk Food"
- Patent Filing Claims Solar Energy ‘Breakthrough’
- Climate Change's 'Evil Twin': Ocean Acidification
- Disaster Capitalism Strikes as Hedge Funds Circle Near-Bankrupt Municipalities Like Vultures
- Ignoring Bee Crisis, EPA Greenlights New 'Highly Toxic' Pesticide
- Patent Filing Claims Solar Energy ‘Breakthrough’
- Wisconsin Bill Would Treat Organic Milk, Sharp Cheddar, Brown Eggs as "Junk Food"
- Climate Change's 'Evil Twin': Ocean Acidification
- In 'March Toward Disaster,' World Hits 400 PPM Milestone
- Ignoring Bee Crisis, EPA Greenlights New 'Highly Toxic' Pesticide
Popular content
Today's Top News
The End Is at Hand (to Leftist Conspiracy Theories)
With the polls continuing to show Barack Obama holding a steady or even growing lead heading into Election Day, especially in the key swing states of Pennsylvania, Ohio, Florida, Colorado, New Hampshire and Virginia, and with Democratic challengers looking strong in at least 10 Senate races and dozens of open-seat or Republican-held House races, it's looking like this will be a big win for Democrats, both in the presidential and the Congressional races.
Hopefully one thing such an across-the-boards win will lead to would be a withering away of the self-destructive conspiracy-theory paranoia that has gripped much of the Left over the last eight years.
Once largely emblematic of the far Right, which saw black helicopters of the dreaded United Nations behind every mountain, Jews running everything, Communists working nefariously under every bed, fluoridation plots, an immigrant assault on the Anglo-Saxon gene pool, and a liberal cabal out to steal their assault hunting rifles, now the Left is awash in the same kind of fevered thinking.
Chief among the leftist conspiracy theories are that the Bush/Cheney administration was behind the 9-11 attacks, that the current administration has plans to cancel or annul the November 4 election and institute martial law, that there are plans for a "false flag" attack on American forces which will be used to justify an all-out war against Iran, that there is a false-flag terror attack planned inside the US set for before the election, designed to throw the vote towards John McCain, that the Wall Street meltdown and subsequent bail-out are a deliberate scheme to steal the nation's assets and funnel them into Republican pockets, and that Republican operatives have the technological capability, and plan to steal the current election by manipulating the results on the electronic voting machines used by many election districts. In a variant of the Right's anti-Semitic ravings, the Left attributes god-like powers to the Israel lobby and its formal lobbying organization, the American Israel Public Affairs Committee (AIPAC)
Never mind that some of these conspiracies are mutually exclusive (if Bush and Cheney are going to declare martial law, they should have no need to steal the election), or that it's getting pretty late in the game for others to actually happen. The common thread running through these conspiracies is that "they" (the Republicans, AIPAC or the ruling corporate elite, as the case may be), have superhuman powers beyond our wildest imaginations, as well as flawless execution, and are going to achieve their evil ends no matter what we do.
Following this line of thinking (if it can be called that), there's no point in voting, because "they" are going to steal the election anyhow (and that, of course, is if the election is even held next week!). There's no point in going to rallies or marches in Washington DC, because "they" are going to attack Iran and start World War III anyhow. Public protest is also dangerous, because "they" are going to declare martial law, and then all of us who go out and publicly oppose the government will end up locked away in detention camps in the Mojavi desert.
I confess, as a journalist, to having unwittingly aided and abetted some of this conspiracy thinking, for example with my reporting on the evidence that all four of the so-called "black boxes" from the two planes that hit the World Trade Center on 9/11 were recovered, and that the FBI actually has them, despite its testimony to the contrary before the 9-11 Commission. I make no apology for, and still stand by that report, which was based upon reliable sources at the National Transportation Safety Administration and in the New York Police Department, but I want to stress that such a report does not justify going beyond asking the logical question, "What is the government hiding here?" to making the wild speculation that it means the government planned and carried out those attacks.
I also reported on solid evidence in 2006 that the Bush/Cheney administration was moving several aircraft carrier battle groups into position in the Persian Gulf in advance of Congressional off-year elections in what appeared to be possible plans for an attack on Iran. I still believe that may have been the administration's game plan, but that it was derailed by senior Republican leaders who prevailed on James Baker, chair of the Iraq War Study Group, to release his team's bi-partisan study three months early, which called for negotiations with Iran and Syria in order to bring peace and stability to the Iraq region. I would add that this is a far cry from imagining that the administration was planning to fake an Iranian attack on American forces.
I am not saying that governments don't engage in treacherous conspiracies. Certainly the faked tale of a Gulf of Tonkin incident was a conspiracy designed to allow the Johnson administration to begin an all-out war against the Vietnamese. And certainly there was a conspiracy in the Bush/Cheney administration during 2002 and early 2003 to mislead and lie to the Congress and the American people about Saddam Hussein's alleged links to 9-11 and to global terrorists. But those relatively simple conspiracies actually prove my point—both have been clearly exposed thanks to leaks, turncoats, and good investigative reporting.
What I am saying is that the grander conspiracies being concocted in the more fevered brains of some people on the Left do not hold up under careful and critical inspection. The biggest failings they share are two: first of all, conspiracies as grand as multi-state election thefts via electronic fraud, and the carrying out of a two-front, high-casualty mass terrorist act on the World Trade Center and the Pentagon, require the cooperation of such large numbers of people that leaks, turncoats, informants and simple screw-ups are inevitable; and secondly, this administration in particular has shown itself to be phenomenally inept, intellectually stunted, and tactically clueless. The War in Iraq, which was supposed to be a "cakewalk," has been an unmitigated disaster for Republicans. The War in Afghanistan is a fiasco. The War on Terror, while a success in terms of helping Republicans win seats in Congress in 2002, and Bush to win re-election in 2004, has been a bust longer term. Management of the US economy has been a model of incompetence. So has the grand plan to crush Democrats and create a dominant Republican Party for the next century. The Rovian campaign strategy of lies, smears and dirty tricks, while initially successful, appears to have worn out its effectiveness in just three two-year national election cycles.
None of this would matter except that I think the Left's embrace of conspiracy-theories has become profoundly damaging to the whole progressive movement. Conspiracy thinking produces a deep cynicism towards positive action and towards the kind of long-term organizing upon which real social and political change depends. When people think that the fix is in, they are not inclined to put time and energy into the hard work of organizing unions, working to get local candidates elected to office, running for positions on party committees, etc. Conspiracy thinking also leads people on the left to completely write off the Democratic Party as a vehicle for progressive change, as the notion that "they" run everything is broadened to include in the term "they" the elected Democrats in the White House and Congress. Democrats may be weenies, but such a conflation of Republicans and Democrats is also self-defeating nonsense, as is the notion that Obama is "just another tool" of the corporate/imperialist power structure. Democrats are not just Republicans by another name, and Obama is not just McCain or Bush with a better tan.
The reality is that if Obama is elected president, and if Democrats end up gaining solid control of Congress, it will be critically important for progressives to organize powerfully to press this new government to do the right things—promptly ending the two wars in the Middle East, taking strong and far-reaching action to tackle global warming, restoring some basic equity to the economic and tax system, making health care affordable and available to all, restoring the Constitution and the Bill of Rights, demanding punishment for those in the current administration who have committed crimes, and so on.
We cannot expect Obama, or the Democrats in Congress who have proven themselves to be such gutless compromisers, to take significant progressive actions on their own. They must be driven by force of public action to do the right thing.
Maybe when this election goes right and isn't stolen, making Obama the president, and debunking the vote-theft fear-mongers, and when Obama goes on to be inaugurated in January, without being blocked by a military coup, these paranoid conspiracy theories will fade away and people on the Left will start working to make change happen instead of imagining reasons why it can't or just moaning that "they" are going to destroy us all.
- Posted in
Comments
Note: Disqus 2012 is best viewed on an up to date browser. Click here for information. Instructions for how to sign up to comment can be viewed here. Our Comment Policy can be viewed here. Please follow the guidelines. Note to Readers: Spam Filter May Capture Legitimate Comments...


210 Comments so far
Show AllLindorff has made some great points about the conspiracy-theorists out there. The paranoia is in itself paralyzing. Even if all of the conspiracies we hear and believe are true, then the paralyzing fear it causes will be exactly what "They" want. The only way to overcome even the possibility of these theories is to overcome the fear they are meant to inflict and stand for what is right and what we believe in.
If, and hopefully when, Obama become president we must do as Lindorff writes and press the new administration to do what is needed. That is our only hope. And we must always hold on to hope. Only 4 years of Obama will truly show us if he is "just another tool" of the corporatists.
"The price of freedom is eternal vigilance."
-- Thomas Jefferson
Does this mean that we should bury our heads, not dare to look, lest we scare ourselves into missing an organizing meeting?
RepublicanTroll October 31st, 2008 10:10 am
"Only 4 years of Obama will truly show us if he is "just another tool" of the corporatists."
His Senate voting record, which Dem apologists have studiously ignored, has already shown just that.
Lobo Gris
.All Lindorff has accomplished here is to show his bias. The facts are pretty darn plain to anyone who can think sans partisanship. Complicity is hardly excused by raising the spectre of "conspiracy theories" and lumping the most extreme of such with the very real evidence of democratic complicity for the entire term of this current administration. Just a cheap trick.
.
We see things, not as they are, but as we are.
Anais Nin
We will have to see what the elction bears out.
But so far with all the reported early voting 'irregularities' and documentaed evidence of black box polls vote-flipping, as well as multiple states purging of the voter registration rolls, we will see another repeat of 2000/2004 Republican tactics leading to a 'win'.
Walk in peace.
Flipping the votes on the screen is just poorly calibrated voting machines.
Think about it. That would be the dumbest way possible to 'steal' votes. Why show the voter that their vote was stolen? You wouldn't need to. If you are going to tamper with the programming to steal the vote, it would make far more sense to have the screen tell the voter that they voted for Obama, but have the vote recorded for McCain internally. Why even tell the voter?
Or, the whole bit with the voting machines is all a red herring. The real way to steal an election is to control the vote COUNTING machines. Why bother with the voting machines when you can make the central computers that count the votes just give any results you want?
----------------------------
"To know, and not to do, is not to know"
Control the vote tabulation you say? You mean, like the Repubs already don't?
This 'election' will have results that are just as fraudulent as 2000 and 2004.
McCain is all ready to deliver his victory speech. The MSM is poised to celebrate the miraculous 'come from behind' victory. And once again, the exit polls will not match the final tally.
There has been study after study, expose after expose that the Diebold style voting machines are childsplay to hack and subvert.
I think it would be a grand thing if Obama won. Be even better if her survived his first term.
But I have to be honest and say that I fully expect the vote to be hacked, and that on Nov. 5, John 'Bomb Bomb' McCain will be announced as the winner.
Walk in peace.
We already know why the exit polls don't match the McCain victory. There's the Bradley effect, disgruntled Hillary voters going for Palin, and the vaunted 72 hour Republican get out the vote campaign that always does wonders.
Thanks! Nice piece.
There's not a chance of this election being stolen 'from' Obama. The powerful have invested hundreds of millions in his campaign to get him elected. They certainly won't steal it from him now, nor tolerate it being stolen.
If there's vote theft, it would go towards Obama if it was needed, which it won't be. Or, it will be in deliberately undercounting the Nader-McKinney vote. They might let the Barr vote stand just so the Republicans can engage in the same sort of 'blame Barr' nonsense that the Dems have done with Nader over the years.
----------------------------
"To know, and not to do, is not to know"
Of course, the only 'pressure' that would move Obama would be a strong 3rd party campaign in 2010 that would threaten sitting Democrats and thus their control of Congress.
Power is the only thing these people understand. We must be able to develop political power and show we can wield it.
If you think silly marches permitted by the police through empty cities on Saturdays, or letters to the White House will 'pressure' Obama into doing something different than what his contributors want, you are dreaming.
The only way to 'pressure' these politicians is to develop political power. This means creating the power to hurt them. The only way to hurt them is to make them lose elections. But that threat in front of them, and they'll listen. And that's the only way Obama will even bother to listen to us.
----------------------------
"To know, and not to do, is not to know"
Samson, you're getting warmer.
Obama now, for myriad reasons. Progressives in 2010 - not to threaten Dems' control of Congress per se, but to force them to persuade progressives to caucus with them in order to retain said control. Progressives whenever and wherever they have any chance of being elected, and regardless of their party affiliation. It takes numbers to build a movement.
And where there is no progressive who has any chance of winning, and there's any discernible difference between the other candidates, do the smart thing and vote for the best candidate who does have any chance to win - and start lobbying them to move in the right direction. Believe it or not, most politicians aren't (consciously) amoral tools of the corporations. They really believe they're doing the right thing. Our job is as much to change the dialog as it is to win a particular argument. Shift the frame and the pols will follow.
Been there, done that. It was tried with Clinton and his majority congress in his first term. It failed.
Keep trying. What do you propose as an alternative, other than casting a vote every four years that has no effect and is barely noticed?
Elect progressives where you can; where you can't elect progressives, elect the best you can elect.
Yeah, and speaking of leftist conspiracy theories-- what a relief that we'll finally be shed of that tinfoil-hat crap about Mumia abu-Jamal being framed, or deprived of due process by some de facto "conspiracy" of cops, prosecutors, and judges.
Once those "Free Mumia" wackos clear off, we'll be able to finally have a chance to have protest rallies with respectable dissenters, who won't appall and outrage decent folk.
And Obama is pro-death penalty! So we may get to finally bury this tempest in a teapot after all!
I smell progress!
I could care less about the Mumia case. But really, dude. Your attitude sucks.
Stop spending so much time in front of the mirror, dude.
.Please stop holding back, Im certain you have something to offer this forum, no really!
.
We see things, not as they are, but as we are.
Anais Nin
What do you know about Mumia?
there is no paranoia regarding the vulnerability of the electronic voting machines...that has been verified
dismissing the bush\9-11 conspiracy? in favor of which theory?
ulitimately, however, those issues are small compared to the continuing toxification of the planet due to human industrial activity, which is also not a theory, but a fact...
Once again, a complete misrepresenation of the 911 Truth Movement. The Movement is not monolithic, and the common theme is NOT that we have decided "Bush did it!" That is reductionist and misleading.
All most of us in the Truth Movement are saying is the the Official Conspiracy Theory the government has offered is full of inconsistencies. We are asking for a new, impartial investigation that addresses the many questions raised by everyone from school teachers to structural engineers.
He says that, "Conspiracy thinking produces a deep cynicism..." I would argue the conspiracy thinking RESULTS from deep cynicism, which in turn results from the fact we have lost faith in the major media and government, and must try to shift through information ourselves. You are indulging in wishful thinking when you say this is "the end" of conspiracy theories. Mr. Lindorf, you are welcome to shut down your brain and believe in government farytales, but we have a right and a reason to go right on searching for the truth.
You must realize that much of the paranoia from the left has been justified. The 2000 and 2004 elections were both proven after the fact to have been won by the left, yet they were stolen. 9-11 may or may not have been carried out by Bush and his minions, yet there are so many holes and inconsistencies in the official story that it looks like swiss cheese. Until someone answers some of the tough questions surrounding those events in a way that doesn't insult one's intelligence, there is still reason to be a bit worried.
People forget that conspiracies DO happen. Look at Watergate, look at Iran/Contra, look at all the lies of this administration! So you can't sit here and tell me that it can't/won't happen again. This article does absolutely NOTHING to curb my fears of this administration, it's followers, our voting process, or our due process of law regarding 9-11, which should have been treated as a crime, but not as an impetus for war.
Call me paranoid - but at least I'm not burying my head in the sand, either.
You are right! The Tuskeegee experiment sounds like the craziest conspiracy theory I have ever heard. Yet it was confirmed to be TRUE and I watched then President Clinton apologize for it on national TV!
Me thinks Lindorff doth protest too much.
Really, this essay, which aims to get progessives to vote for Obama, is too general to be effective. There really has been vote fraud, so what is Lindorff talking about? The fraud is not monolithic, but it's been documented in specific cases. No one has been advocating not voting because of it, despite what Lindorff says.
The militarists won't need to roll out the tanks in January. Obama's a strong supporter of pouring more of our commonwealth into the military industrial complex. Why oppose someone who will keep the loot flowing?
So, Lindorff tries to throw every speculative idea at "leftists" to prove they should vote for the Goldman Sachs candidate? It's not helpful, nor entertaining.
We've already said why we won't vote for Obama, but there's no response from Lindorff. So if "Democrats are not just Republicans by another name," why do they vote the same? And what's your vision for forcing Obama to do the correct thing?
You have no idea how to accomplish the Obama push you propose.
-TIA
Note that none of Lindorff's "Following this line ,,," actually lead where he claims.
Mr. Lindorff, in this hyperbole-filled piece, seems to be seems to be painting, with a broad brush, his "conspiracy- kook" accusations on all of the more activist wing of the left. The "911 Truthers" were never more than a small minority of activists. And surely, he isn't painting tin-foil hats on those who point out undeniable evidence of election tampering in Florida in 2000, and several states-notably Ohio in 2004 - but it looks like he might be.
Mr. Lindorff admittedly makes some good points, but I felt quite uncomfortable reading it. I've seen such writing before....now I remember; all those Liberal-left pundits taht attacked teh activist left in the Clinton and early Bush years - Corn, Cooper, Greider, Hitchens, others. A classic example is here, where yours truly even gets misquoted:
http://www.laweekly.com/2002-11-07/news/behind-the-placards
My Response being the long rebuttal letter to the editor here:
http://www.laweekly.com/2003-01-16/news/letters
They levelled the same "loony-extremist" and even red-baiting (!) accusations when we protested against the disasterous global corporate trade agreements negotiated largely in secret, the Yugoslavia bombing following the Ramboullet trechery, The Iraq sanctions, the invasion of Afghanistan following the Sept 11 crimes, and even, most damningly, even the run-up to the Iraq War, as the above link shows.
And my suspicions are increased when Mr. Lindorff writes that we should orgaiize to make "health care affordable and available to all".
Anyone active in this issue knows that the call for "affordable" healthcare is just code-language for "defeat the extremist socialists who support FREE healthcare for all as a human right - i.e single payer.
Yeah, I noticed that reference to "affordable" health care, too. That is simply impossible with the insurance industry in charge. Ya think they're gonna let their profits be cut? USAn is absolutely right, "affordable" is code for keep the insurance industry happy. This scam can easily go on for another 8 years. Lindorff really disappoints me.
I am heartened by this: Howard Zinn has now endorsed Nader. He admits it was a mistake to say he supports Obama, who - in his own words - is only slightly to the left of the Republican Party. That's how it done, folks. Just run someone who is only slightly better. Make sure the election is designed to be mostly about "character," not about agenda or voting records - boring stuff like that. People like a show and the directors gave them a doozy:
"He doesn't make eye contact!" "He's wandering around the stage like a nutcase!" "Their supporters are are chanting racist remarks!" "Sarah Palin spends too much on clothing!" "Michelle Obama buys her cloths from J. Crew!" "Iraq for 100 years!" Take a deep breath now and look at Obama. ahhhh. Doesn't he look like a reasonable, good candidate? Mission accomplished.
Yeah, all those HUNDREDS of kooky leftist architects, engineers, former military/intelligence officers, academics, pilots, who risked their careers to speak out against the official fiction of 9/11 and HALF of all New Yorkers, and I believe a near majority of Americans who believe the government still has a lot of questions to answer about 9/11 will just all be magically convinced otherwise when Obama "wins" the election.
All those signing statments and consolidation of executive power by this administration-- including the ability to take over every level of law enforcement and impose martial law without any approval from Congress -- was all just for fun. When they lose this election, they will just hand it over like good sports. After all, look how gracefully they took their loss to Clinton.
Those conspiracy-lovin' leftists, with their chemical analyses, laws of physics, thousands of hours of painstaking data mining, investigation and testimony from insiders -- they'll finally give up that nonsense!
Another meaningless article taking up space here on Common Dreams.
But I did want to comment: this election has allready been stolen. Both major parties and most americans stole it when they did not insist on a level playing field for Nader, McKinney, Kucinich, Gravel, (and) Barr, Baldwin, Paul, etc. The election was stolen when it takes over $600 million to win it. Those of you who vote within these confines are complicit in this theft of democracy.
Exactly -- it is rigged from the get go.
"Money" is the way that the few steal from the many -that's its intended purpose.
Trying to make it do the opposite is like taming a dragon.
Sure it could work, but how?
Lindorff has spent the better part of ten years stumping for Democrats. He has a little tantrum every now and again, but he always comes home on time.
There is absolutely NOTHING the Democrats can do to shake Lindorff from the herd. Can't you see it ......
The herd is restless, some are moving out of line, others follow, but wait! look out! there's a big bad wolf lurking behind the trees, hurry get back to the herd, don't wander! Don't think! Get into that pen and quickly, now. ahhhh. safe at last.
For instance, the much bandied-about notion that Bush & Cheney would cancel the elections always struck me as ludicrous & paranoid.
-maybe so Rich but I thought it was at least possible given Bush's complete disregard for the law.
Republicans have used their power with relatively little conscience and have shown the world that they can do some extremely remarkable, even unbelievable (albeit evil) things. If there are no conspiracies, there are true to life tales amazingly close to the line: Iraq, the American economy, the hijacking of the constitution. I have often sat and pondered, other than for the sheer money of it all, why the Republicans were so ruthless in everything they did if not for some utopian dream which to achieve it would mean to "win at all costs." Bush gave the conspiracy theorists every reason to be so.
Mr. Lindorff has been sniffing the ink on his absentee ballot again.
Don't get me wrong; I have deep respect for Mr. Lindorff and much of what he writes.
This article, however, makes some very poor judgments and assumptions.
To be sure, some "conspiracy theories" are just not credible. Many of these theories make it impossible for the left to gain broader credibility with the public. If you show that Bush's family did business with the Nazi's and then try to convince the American people that Bush has Nazi tendencies, you're not going to fare very well trying to convince people about voting machine fraud or how the war in Iraq was waged for oil.
The point of agreement, then, is that many of these theories are just not ready for prime time. If you want to pursue them, fine; just don't push them as fact until you're "ready to go to court." Otherwise, it hurts the left.
However, it is wrong to go further and say not to be ever vigilant about those with power. Part of that process is to envision, even from the thinnest evidence, what might have occurred behind closed doors. Always start with a big heaping dose of skepticism. Envision the possibilities no matter how convoluted they may be. Then follow the evidence without bias to prove or disprove your suspicions. This is vigilance; not folly.
Mr. Lindorff really steps off the deep end when he assumes, without evidence, that those who examine conspiracies do nothing else. Does he have evidence for this? While we all could, perhaps, do more to bring about progressive change, why pick on conspiracy theorists? Let them do their research. Some of those theories might be very worth investigating.
Mr. Lindorff acknowledges that some conspiracy theories have been proven true. But then he says that they:
"have been clearly exposed thanks to leaks, turncoats, and good investigative reporting."
Investigative reporting by whom? Elite professional journalists like him? Is his point that the public, i.e. the skeptical citizen, should not get involved with researching these theories? I beg to differ.
As for Mr. Lindorff's comments about electing Obama and then working to change what he does, I agree with other posters who pointed out that the only clout we will ever have is to become politically threatening to the Democratic Party. Whether we build a successful third party that could actually win an election or not, the first step should be to gain sufficient political power to force the Democrats to at least negotiate with us on some issues or risk losing to the Republicans. This business that we'll be able to get Obama to change is total nonsense. He's made very, very clear what he plans to do.
No sooner will Obama be in office then we'll start hearing about how the 2010 election is just around the corner and how we should "grow up" and stop being "purists" and not "rock the boat." We'll soon be hearing all those "liberal political pragmatists" explaining that Obama can't do what we want because it would jeopardize the Democrats' electoral chances in the next election or the next or the next or the next or the next. Voting with Democrats is not a path toward progressive change.
For another viewpoint ... http://www.worldreports.org/news
It is only a series of small steps from bribing legislators, lobbyists writing legislation, to corruption and pro-active manipulation of news and events.
As regards "fixing" the vote ...
Compare exit pools from places where e-voting takes place with exit polls from places where there is a paper trail. If there is a significant variation between them and the official figures, then it could point to manipulation.
That was done. Yes, there's a difference - which always favored Bush. Sorry I don't have time to dig up a link.
Oregoncharles
"...carrying out of a two-front, high-casualty mass terrorist act on the World Trade Center and the Pentagon, require the cooperation of such large numbers of people..."
Lindorff, and many other 911-Deniers, shoots himself in the foot with that statement. Which is more likely, a large number of rogue, out of the mainstream, foreigners coordinating such activities in a distant land, or a large number of highly connected insiders, operating in their own homeland?
Yes, it requires dupes like Lindorff to propagate the mythology. "Too big to be true!" "Too big to fail." Too big, Mr. Lindorff, it's all TOO BIG.
Surveys consistently show that at least 1/3 and 2/3 (and sometimes over 85%) of the American people doubt the official 911 story. A good share believe Bush knew is advance, and may even have been involved. 911 Truth of some form is fairly mainstream and even the major media have admitted this. We are NOT a fringe group that people are ignoring, even if we started out that way. Every agent for change is at first ridiculed.
Third parties are a type of boycott vote, and that is a perfectly legitimate strategy. Again, many people know the 2-party system is a failure and they boycott by not voting AT ALL. Casting a 3rd party vote sends the message that you are not apathetic, but you just don't have anyone in the major parties who represents your views.
I don't know who you are qualifying as a "real progressive," but progressives are about change and being on the leading edge of change is tough. If you are obedient and confine yourself to "the system" and "the mainstream," I would argue you might be liberal but not "progressive." Progressives ARE radicals to the mainstream at first. So what? That is how REAL CHANGE happens.
Like David Lindorf, you manage to discredit yourself, the uncurious.
"For every Blue State "radical" Nader voter there are 10 real progressives working within the system to change the status quo. Facing down people who back in the day would have had your head takes alot of courage. As does engaging your Red State neighbors."
Please, excuse my language, as I must respond...
Bullshit.
"10 real progressives" (anywhere) in the democratic party is an oxymoron. The description "courage"-- likewise.
I've never, ever, seen a such spineless, criminal, gutless, lying, sniveling self-righteous crowd of cowards in my fucking life.
Listen up, highkarate: Your man Obama, your "full-house" congress, and those 10's of "real progressives", better start getting to work next Wednesday morning--pronto. "Organizing", "working within the system", and all the rest of that shit you endlessly carp about.
Your big shot at Glory is Imminent. Your Destiny is at Hand. You have Arrived.
As of November 5th, I want to hear you candy-ass, sorry fuckers are huddled together in your little hidey-holes, "facing down" the enemy and fixing this pile O shit we reluctantly call a "government".
And don't EVEN think of coming out until you've done something besides what you've done best for the past 45+ fucking years: N-O-T-H-I-N-G.
Now, get to work... ASSHOLES.
Thank you, and good luck.
.Damned eloquent!
.
We see things, not as they are, but as we are.
Anais Nin
. you punk
you punk you punk you punk
you punk you punk
. you punk you punk
you punk
Well, I dont know about moonpie but you have certainly convinced me!
We see things, not as they are, but as we are.
Anais Nin
All fine points, except that DL draws some clearly wrong conclusions:
"...this administration in particular has shown itself to be phenomenally inept, intellectually stunted, and tactically clueless. The War in Iraq, which was supposed to be a "cakewalk," has been an unmitigated disaster for Republicans. The War in Afghanistan is a fiasco. The War on Terror, while a success in terms of helping Republicans win seats in Congress in 2002, and Bush to win re-election in 2004, has been a bust longer term. Management of the US economy has been a model of incompetence."
They never believed the Iraq "war" would be a cakewalk. Some of them said that, but they're notorious liars - they wanted and got an endless occupation and, hence, endless war profiteering. Same with the "war on terror," plus cool bonuses like the Patriot Act, the Military Commissions Act, the Dept. of Homeland Security, increased worldwide arms sales, etc. And, management of the U.S. economy is, in their eyes, lovely - the "friends of the family" are doing better than ever. We The People were never relevant to begin with.
Sadly, DL has fallen for the ruse - that idiots are in charge. Nothing is further from the truth...
The real conspiracy is the Two Party System itself.
Jumping on the "conspiracy theory" redux in promoting Obama propoganda at this stage of the game does indeed put a glaring spotlight on his motivations. As RichM pointed out above, "...Conspiracy thinking also leads people on the left to completely write off the Democratic Party as a vehicle for progressive change..."--you definitely got that right, Lindorf. Whether it's voter fraud, 911 truth, AIPAC, or other issues, Mr. Lindorf comes off as either quite ignorant or perhaps commissioned by some entity to bundle up these controversial issues for debunking, maybe something in between. Very suspicious, and very sad. This really does draw attention to a lapse in integrity.
Conspiracy is when two or more people agree to commit a crime. We have to analyze all these allegations on the basis of all the available facts. Some of them are provable, some of them not. So, for example, the invasion of Iraq was a conspiracy. It was a crime and we know who all conspired.
All too many of us find what we want to find, not what is really there. The national media tends to give weight to a story not on the basis of whether or not the charges are valid but on other criteria. Usually, stories gain credence in mainstream circles on the basis of who is making the charges. If a figure of national stature makes a charge it can be discussed seriously. Maybe it's not true, but it will garner a lot of attention. So, all kinds of elected conservative officials are attacking ACORN and the media just runs it. The charges are transparently false. But, if someone on the fringes of power makes a charge it will typically be given attention to be ridiculed, or never rise to the level of prominence needed. So, when Sibel Edmonds makes charges of massive criminality in the FBI and Congress and cover up at the 9-11 Commission---and they're all provable---it can't rise to the level of national discussion, because she doesn't have any power.
One should not judge, then, based on who is making the charges, but carefully look into the facts. This takes time and a lot of research.
On this basis alone, there's no such construct as "leftist" conspiracy theories; there are conspiracies that are provable and there are those that are not.
Barack Obama was for single payer before he came out against it.
Stolen elections are an undeniable conspiracy by the Republicans -- hopefully this on won't be. I agree that there has been too much of an obsession with conspiracy thinking and I too hope it will end. I think much of the fault lies in secretive, conspiratorial government and the real conspiracies, like the neocon agenda and the invasion of Iraq are easy enough to spot. Others like the 9-11 obsession cost us credibility.
The Jaded Prole
this kind of logic numbs the senses
we, the 9/11 truth movement, have been putting up with this kind of shit for 7 years
if there is nothing to hide and nothing new to discover then why not have an investigation into the events of 9/11
there has never been one
how is it that 2300 people, can be killed by persons unkown and yet there is no investigation
it is true that the 9/11 movement has not been all cream but with the rotten curds we have had to work with we have done the best we can
this writer acknowledges the lies of the gulf of tonkin - 65 thousnad american dead, 3 million vietnamese dead, and he doesn't think its possible for the government to pull this off
how about pearl harbor - the japanese aided and abetted by a president who ran on the main idea that he would not join the war - then lied and sacrificed around 2300 citizens to get into it
9/11 truth has now been joined by architects for 9/11 truth, pilots for 9/11 truth, physycists for 9/11 truth, clergy for 9/11 truth
overseas, the view is quite unanimous that 9/11 was an inside job
so contrary to this shill reportage, it is not the extreme left or even the left that comprises the 9/11 truth movement
there is a wide spectrum of people in the movement - it cannot be discounted quite as easily as this hack writer thinks
we are not holding to the notion that obama will be doing anything to help us
in fact, once he gets your sorry asses buried in afghanistan you are going to rue the day the corporations decided to blow up wtc buildings 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7 and 8
the corporations get the oil and the public gets the body bags
finally, remember this, just because you are paranoid doesn't mean that no one is looking
cheers, b