I really do not follow the logic of those still proposing that we rumble, demand, get angry and organize and talk nice with those betraying nature, natures laws, God and everything good in the world. Because a handful of our population including our representatives are not doing what they pledged to do and in all sense and purpose have sold their souls to the devil, is our soulution to rumble with them? These lost souls, no matter how much we fight, beg, or plead with cannot help us. We do not comprehend the level of depravity that these individuals are suffering from. The more we connect with them the more we sell our souls. Those of us that get this would do better in understanding the need to disconnect our sense of right and power from them unless they give us any hope that this right and power that we send their way will come through intact instead of going into their domain of black space and dying like a bird frozen in the cold of winter. Right now as Ralph succinctly points out it's death to all birds of hope in the environment of greed and corruption that rules like a monster in our government with the head of it living in what should now be dubbed the Black house. "Black house" as in worsening the greed and corruption growing still out of control in the promise land, and we must wonder what forces of justice are now at work against this mixing pot of beliefs, cultures and colors that came together to steal this land and claim it was because of our goodness that we would could, only to find the eventual leaders would not found but instead lose goodness in the end.

A new promise and hope can be established beyond the corruption but only in the spaces that still offers such hope. That space is with the humble common human with their beliefs and hopes set on the truth and dedicated to freely serving that above all else. Here all promise is held and awaiting our recognition, if we the majority could just awake from the nightmare we put ourselves within of this minority bound to their avarice and blinded by their greed.

The bailouts were opposed last year from all sides albeit for different reasons. A lot of us agreed with Nader, Mckinney, Barr, Paul, etc ... that the bailouts would simply lead to more financial abuses and boy are they correct. Unfortunately, despite Mccain and Obama proudly voting for it and Obama even going way out of his league to bribe his own party members including the already corrupted Congressional Black Caucus members, the electorate shot itself in the feet and picked between Mccain and Obama while few of us choose to be truly wise voters. It seems that the electorate doesn't appear to want to elect pols based on the issues but more likely on "personality" baloney. Sure, those two parties will pretend on the issues but it's all nothing but sprinkles. Even today, turn on the television and you'll find out that all those sleazy commercials have just gotten sleazier. And reporting? For the most part, forget it.

Another thing is about the outrage itself. The current outrage most of us are shown in the media are the mere partisan types. Even on the recent tea parties, I cannot tell which of them are protesting for true reasons vs those who are protesting simply because their Mccain/Palin ticket didn't win. Most likely, the same Republican supporters who are outraged would have kept quiet if Mccain were in office doing the same thing as are most of the Obama supporters. If Mccain were in office, the Obama supporters would be suddenly showing outrage or maybe not because most of the Democrats in Congress would have played kissyface with Mccain anyway. Instead of having partisan outrage, there needs to be genuine outrage reflecting the fact that the pols in Washington regardless of which party in control are out of touch. That would make it easier for non-corporatist independents to step in and even force the Republicans and Democrats to clean up.

On the next to the last paragraph where Nader mentioned the need to build support starting in one's local communities, I can't seem to thank him enough. Last year, despite all our efforts to nail our House and Senate reps against the bailout, they still passed it anyway. I can see where taking on your reps at the local and even state level are far more effective than on the national level alone although I still think that all levels must be paid attention to.

Hopefully by 2010, we can find Independents across the country ready to throw loads of traitors in both parties out of their House and Senate seats and quit kowtowing to the corporate interests. It would be interesting to see what Obama does by then. I have also heard some people bring up the idea of the need to pay a lot of attention to local and state elections. I think that in some states, 3rd party support is growing while in others such as mine, it's not often the case. When it comes to local and state elections, in most cases the voters are not informed that there even is a race going on until the last minute or unless they hear a sound bite on the radio from a candidate or even from a billboard by luck.

P.S.:

I know that once again, some Obamabot troll is going to come in here and say "Well, I guarantee you that he or she won't be elected for choosing to do the right thing so your vote for 3rd party is a waste, blah-blah-blah." Fine, keep deluding yourselves about who's "electable" whether we're talking about the primaries or the general election and keep re-electing status quo. Keep up your partisan shilling and pay no attention to the actual issues because the partisans in both parties are the problem. Keep allowing the big corporations to get worse and keep on fighting on privatizing employment so that more people are forced to work for companies that they don't like because there's no way they can keep up with the rising costs of living. And then you'll wonder why you're stuck in the poor house.

Please bear with me, I am going to post links and excerpts from three articles regarding the evils of lobbying, a particular pet peeve of mine and a chief way our legislative intent is subverted:

http://projects.publicintegrity.org/rx/report.aspx?aid=723

Drug Lobby Second to None
How the pharmaceutical industry gets its way in Washington

By M. Asif Ismail

WASHINGTON, July 7, 2005 — The pharmaceutical and health products industry has spent more than $800 million in federal lobbying and campaign donations at the federal and state levels in the past seven years, a Center for Public Integrity investigation has found. Its lobbying operation, on which it reports spending more than $675 million, is the biggest in the nation. No other industry has spent more money to sway public policy in that period. Its combined political outlays on lobbying and campaign contributions is topped only by the insurance industry.

The drug industry's huge investments in Washington—though meager compared to the profits they make—have paid off handsomely, resulting in a series of favorable laws on Capitol Hill and tens of billions of dollars in additional profits. [See What the Industry Got.] They have also fended off measures aimed at containing prices, like allowing importation of medicines from countries that cap prescription drug prices, which would have dented their profit margins. Pfizer, the world's largest drug company, made a profit of $11.3 billion last year, out of sales of $51 billion.

The industry's multi-faceted influence campaign has also led to a more industry-friendly regulatory policy at the Food and Drug Administration, the agency that approves its products for sale and most directly oversees drug makers. [See FDA: A Shell of its Former Self]
Top 20 global pharmaceutical corporations

Most of the industry's political spending paid for federal lobbying. Medicine makers hired about 3,000 lobbyists, more than a third of them former federal officials, to advance their interests before the House, the Senate, the FDA, the Department of Health and Human Services, and other executive branch offices.

In 2003 alone, the industry spent nearly $116 million lobbying the government. That was the year that Congress passed, and President George W. Bush signed, the Medicare Modernization Act of 2003, which created a taxpayer-funded prescription drug benefit for senior citizens.

That figure was not anomalous. In 2004, drug makers upped their reported expenditures on lobbyists to $123 million, a record amount for the industry. Of the 1,291 lobbyists who were listed that year as prepresenting pharmaceutical corporations and their trade groups, some 52 percent were former federal officials.

By adding the benefit to Medicare, the government program that provides health insurance to some 41 million people, the industry found a reliable purchaser for its products. Thanks to a provision in the law for which the industry lobbied, government programs like Medicare are barred from negotiating with companies for lower prices.

Critics charge that the prescription drug benefit will transfer wealth from taxpayers, who provide the funding for Medicare, to pharmaceutical firms. According to a study done in October 2003 by Boston University professors Alan Sager and Deborah Socolar, 61 percent of Medicare money spent on prescription drugs will become profit for drug companies. Drug-makers will receive $139 billion in increased profits over eight years, the study predicts. The Medicare prescription drug benefit starts in 2006.