All the eggs should never be in one assassination basket, especially in a nation over suckers and ruled by crooks.

Biden may have been selected because crooks talked Obama into picking him.  He would make a good successor for them if Obama is killed.  Obama has become the perfect sacrificial lamb for the crooks.  If they kill him they demoralize and weaken the left for good.  They will destroy their will to fight.  It is the same with Anwar.  Environmentalists but toomany eggs in a remote basket.  The goal for the crooks is not the oil.  They want to destroy the environmental movement by destroying its will to fight.

He managed to con everyone into believing that crookism is the real capitalism.  Capitalism is fairly rare but it is like a Poker game between equals.  Crookism is the game reserved for suckers in the back where no form of deception is left to chance.

Obama wasn’t Educated at the U of Chicago, Parcelus, he just taught there.  But I was and your comment about it’s reactionary ideology is perfectly justified, not only in poltical science but economics and social theory as well.

It is currently building a 200 million dollar institute named for Milton Freedman, that the U keeps asking me to contribute to.  fat chance.

They don’t like it when they think you give a shit.

Paracelsus, August 23 at 2:36 pm #

“You are a damn lying garbage-spewing smear artist.”

I went to snopes.com and found out I was misinformed. I do apologize for my unmalicious error. I don’t think you should assume the worst of me right off the bat. In short I oppose my government in DC. I wish my state could secede. I could point out the defects of McCain- his dementia, his psychopathy, his terrible temper, and his lunacy, but I am getting repetitious. All the horses in this race are owned by the same criminal elites. Are you one of those sorts who kisses the footprints of Obama? You have a the temper of a believer who has encountered a heretic. I had best get out of town before I am subjected to the brûlant à petit feu. If I have you wrong, I do ask for pardon.
—————————————————————————
paracelcus,

I don’t bear grudges. My objection to your post was that it sounds just like the “Obama Nation” book currently topping the New York Times bestseller list because its sales were pumped up by some right-wing organizations making bulk purchases. The author, Jerome Corsi, is a paid professional liar who also wrote that “Unfit for Command” Swiftboater book about John Kerry. The guy is among the lowest life forms on the planet Earth. It was of a piece with “Obama is a Muslim” and “Obama won’t say the Pledge of Allegiance” or “won’t put his hand on his heart during the Pledge”. This is the lowest form of political sludge there is. To me it sounded like you believed and were perpetuating this foulness. I suggest you go to http://my.barackobama.com/page/content/fightthesmearshome/

Read what Obama has to say about these kinds of smears.

It’s not that I am a true believer in Obama, who is a very talented but imperfect politician, but that I am a true believe in the truth itself and I will not allow utter falsehoods and lies about him to be spread.

“I have yet to be convinced that Obama is evil, but some of his advisors definitely are.”

Obama was educated at University of Chicago. The U of C practices an especially virulent form of political science. I can’t imagine Obama not imbibing the serpent’s milk of Strauss in one form or another.Maleducation is a subtle corrupter of the soul.

I have yet to be convinced that Obama is evil, but some of his advisors definitely are.  Since the system (largely crook media) always keeps out the wheat and gives us the shaft, I find that I have never voted FOR anyone with much confidence.  I have always voted against the greater scum which has always been the one most likely to screw America most in the service of the rich. That’s the way it always is with crookism, which is the only true American philosophy.  The evil of two lessers combined with the lesser of two evils.  That is the only “choice” anyone will ever get.

The real politics is on the net, with friends, and in the streets.  As long as enough of us are still dumb suckers, they can always take advantage of any weakness.  That’s what crookism is all about.

“I’m sure you don’t care, but this only shows that you, like paracelsus, have no standard of truth at all.”

You and your absolutist statements. If I had no standard of truth at all, then I would not have given a retraction. I have no need for this internecine conflict. You and I should be on the same team, but you would rather vote for evil. Obama is evil. McCain is evil. I won’t vote for evil. (I think I have shown you the transitive property of equivalence in logic.) I will point evil out though.

Zionists like Tony Wicker use gutter comnents to intimidate people,

(1) The name is Wicher, not Wicker, Folktruther.
(2) Calling me a Zionist is precisely gutter language and a damned lie, along with most of the other bullshit you post here. If you would care to google “Wicher” together with “Zionism”, you would find an absolutely consistent record of opposition to Zionism going back to the day I started blogging. There are many Zionist who post here, and every one of them from Howard to Lefty to lilmamzer to ITW can confirm this. So can the Palestinian sympathizers Robert and Fadel. I’m sure you don’t care, but this only shows that you, like paracelsus, have no standard of truth at all. You will say anything. You are hereby a proven slime bucket. That’s not a judgment, that’s not calling names, it’s a clear and simple fact.

Hang in there, Paracelsus.  Zionists like Tony Wicker use gutter comnents to intimidate people, since the policies of Zionism are not only immoral but irrational as well.  It’s the Roach Limbarger school of debate: gibber, grunt and throw feces.

The cause of the “growth of our paternalistic view that presidents are godlike saviors—and therefore democracy’s only important figures” is the evisceration of journalism and social movements.

We must also see the cultural forces that made Americans “dumbed-down” and susceptible to the two forces above.

Why is it we are so dependent on the Fourth Estate to inform us? Why do we need these social movements to follow like sheep?

What happened to the propaganda of “rugged individualist?” Are men and women naturally vulnerable to emotional/propaganda-based appeals from lesser men like Bush and McCain?

Is it a cultural flaw in Americans or are all people unable to perform intelligent decision-making, a necessary ingredient of a democracy.

Evisceration of journalism and social movements are important elements but they cannot work without an “unfit-to-vote” populace.

“You are a damn lying garbage-spewing smear artist.”

I went to snopes.com and found out I was misinformed. I do apologize for my unmalicious error. I don’t think you should assume the worst of me right off the bat. In short I oppose my government in DC. I wish my state could secede. I could point out the defects of McCain- his dementia, his psychopathy, his terrible temper, and his lunacy, but I am getting repetitious. All the horses in this race are owned by the same criminal elites. Are you one of those sorts who kisses the footprints of Obama? You have a the temper of a believer who has encountered a heretic. I had best get out of town before I am subjected to the brûlant à petit feu. If I have you wrong, I do ask for pardon.

@Tony Wicher

Paracelsus:

Obama was born in Hawaii in 1961. A facsimile of Obama’s may be viewed at
http://my.barackobama.com/page/invite/birthcert

You are a damn lying garbage-spewing smear artist.
*****************************
I would thank you not to assume the worst of anyone or to resort to name calling. It is possible to be misinformed. Now, you sound like a raving fanatic.You should know that I hold no hope in my federal government to be fair or just in any good measure. I see a day when we will have to think anew on how we should organize our country or states. We should not rely on the psychopathic “isms” of the past. I may be wrong on Obama’s citizenship, but I do not think I am wrong in thinking we will have the same nasty government we have always had regardless of whom “they” have installed.

http://www.snopes.com/politics/obama/citizen.asp

Likewise, the “natural-born citizen” requirement is not so straightforward either, because the Constitution didn’t define what a natural-born citizen was. (The definition of “natural-born citizen” was left up to individual states to decide until the adoption of the Fourteenth Amendment in 1868, but even that amendment has been subject to further interpretation.) What qualifies a person for natural-born citizenship status under U.S. law can be quite complicated, depending on factors such as where the person was born, when he was born, where he and his parents lived, and the nationalities of his parents.

Some of these factors might seemingly come into play in the case of (presumptive) Democratic presidential nominee Barack Obama. Although his mother was herself a natural-born U.S. citizen, his father was a Kenyan national, and his parents may or may not have been legally married in the eyes of U.S. law. Moreover, his parents split up when he was but a toddler, and his mother soon afterwards married another foreign national and moved with Barack to Indonesia.

The item quoted above posits that Barack Obama does not qualify as a natural-born citizen of the U.S. because the law in effect at the time he was born specified that “If only one parent was a U.S. citizen at the time of your birth, that parent must have resided in the United States for at least ten years, at least five of which had to be after the age of 16.” Since Barack Obama only had one U.S. citizen parent (his mother), and his mother had not been residing in the U.S. for at least five years after the age of 16 when Barack was born (because she herself was only 18 at the time), then he’s not a natural-born citizen.

A few facets of this claim immediately jump out as being far-fetched: first, that a sitting U.S. Senator who has already spent a good deal of time and money securing his party’s nomination for the presidency would suddenly be discovered as ineligible due to an obscure provision of U.S. law; and second, that U.S. law would essentially penalize someone who would otherwise qualify for natural-born citizenship status simply because his mother was too young. The fact is, the qualifications listed in the example quoted above are moot because they refer to someone who was born outside the United States. Since Barack Obama was born in Hawaii, they do not apply to him.

...

Some have claimed that Barack Obama’s Hawaiian birthplace doesn’t qualify him as a natural-born citizen because Hawaii was not yet a state when he was born. This claim is wrong: Hawaii was admitted as the 50th state almost two years before Barack Obama’s birth there (21 August 1959 for statehood vs. 4 August 1961 for Obama’s birthdate).

Some outdated versions of this item conclude by stating that “It should be demanded that Obama produce his 1961 Hawaiian birth certificate,” but in fact his campaign made an image of that document available on the Internet back in mid-2008.

Paracelsus:

Obama was born in Hawaii in 1961. A facsimile of Obama’s may be viewed at
http://my.barackobama.com/page/invite/birthcert

You are a damn lying garbage-spewing smear artist.

Is Barky a US Citizen?

http://www.obamacrimes.com/index.php/component/content/article/1-philip-j-berg-esq-files-federal-lawsuit-requesting-obama-be-removed-as-a-candidate-as-he-does-not-meet-the-qualifications-for-president

Suit filed 08/21/08, No. 08-cv-4083

Contact information at the end of this press release. Documents filed with the court and a copy of this press release can be downloaded at the end of this press release.
(Lafayette Hill, Pennsylvania – 08/21/08) - Philip J. Berg, Esquire, [Berg is a former Deputy Attorney General of Pennsylvania; former candidate for Governor and U.S. Senate in Democratic Primaries; former Chair of the Democratic Party in Montgomery County; former member of Democratic State Committee; an attorney with offices in Montgomery County, PA and an active practice in Philadelphia, PA, filed a lawsuit in Federal Court today, Berg vs. Obama, Civil Action No. 08-cv-4083, seeking a Declaratory Judgment and an Injunction that Obama does not meet the qualifications to be President of the United States. Berg filed this suit for the best interests of the Democratic Party and the citizens of the United States.“Eighteen million Democratic Primary voters donated money, volunteered their time and energy, worked very hard and then not only supported Senator Clinton, but voted for her and often recruited other supporters as well. All the efforts of supporters of legitimate citizens were for nothing because this man lied and cheated his way into a

Philip J. Berg, Esquire stated in his lawsuit that Senator Obama:

  1. Is not a natural-born citizen; and/or

  2. Lost his citizenship when he was adopted in Indonesia; and/or

  3. Has dual loyalties because of his citizenship with Kenya and Indonesia.

Berg stated: “I filed this action at this time to avoid the obvious problems that will occur when the Republican Party raises these issues after Obama is nominated.

There have been numerous questions raised about Obama’s background with no satisfactory answers. The questions that I have addressed include, but are not limited to:

  1. Where was Obama born? Hawaii; an island off of Hawaii; Kenya; Canada; or ?

  2. Was he a citizen of Kenya, Indonesia and/or Canada?

  3. What was the early childhood of Obama in Hawaii; in Kenya; in Indonesia when he was adopted; and later, back to Hawaii?

  4. An explanation as to the various names utilized by Obama that include: Barack Hussein Obama; Barry Soetoro; Barry Obama; Barack Dunham; and Barry Dunham.

  5. Illinois Bar Application – Obama fails to acknowledge use of names other than Barack Hussein Obama, a blatant lie.

************

I advocate the evasion of taxes as a method of resisting the criminals in DC. I ask that people peacefully resist the despots.

We even support the crooks every time we buy paper and pencils.  Use word of mouth, but use it slant.  Don’t act like some stupid know it all.

Tony Wicher: ... I very much disagree with this. For me, at least, the purpose of voting is not to gain the personal good feeling of “making a statement” by voting for the candidate that most closely represents my political position. It is to excercise my power as a citizen to move the country in what I judge to be the right direction.

Can you demonstrate that your approach to voting, which I take to be one lesser-evil vote in a winner-take-all system, moves the country in any direction which my kind of voting doesn’t?  I don’t see it.

It is true that giving money, working for candidates, and proselytizing might influence your community politically, especially if you’re very rich or a big celebrity, but these are not the same as casting a vote, which is what I’m talking about here.

‘only has made it this far because he’s black’ Geraldine Ferraro- another DLC’er
It’s time the Dems acknowledge the FACT our party has been infiltrated and held Hostage by the same forces which conquered the Republican party in the ‘80s.
The DLC is nothing more than NeoCons dressed in Blue.
They work for the Corps- using social issues like shields, just like the tactic used to lure in the Faithful.While blowing smoke upo our asses, they are pushing Corp interests through as laws.
“The Third Way” is nothing more than a Paraphrase for HW’s “New World Order”
Did ya notice the similarity in “Bomb bomb Bomb Iran” and “Obliterate Iran”
Did you see how brazenly the ‘Race Card’ was effective ‘Trumped’ by the ‘Sexism Card’...As a Life long liberal Dem who’s focus on The FACT that Equal Rights means for ALL, this was a dead give away to WHO’s Playbook Hillary was working out of- Chapter One Divide & Conquer.
Ever wonder why the Clintons were so adverse to acknowledging Carters achievements, even ackowledging he was a President- helping to marginialize him and his work EVEN since leaving office?
Because they do not beleive in THAT Democratic party..They are the ‘New’ (NEO) Democrats..The oxymoron term ‘Reagan Democrats’
Wonder whee all those Big Corp dollars have come from in Obama’s campaign which is causing some decension…The Corps which supported Hillary.wonder why Obama is getting advice from some rather shady characters lately- they were released onto his campaign. What would work for Hillary better- an Obama win, which could mean 8 yrs beffore she could run again (as long as Biden doesn’t) or a mere 4 yrs if Mac wins.
I trust Hillary and her band of ‘DLC’ers’ as much as I trust Cheney and his group of minions.
Having been Conned By Bill 2x’s in the ‘90’s, this Ol’ Dem will Never support any Run by Hillary (Or Chelsea) and certanly will be voting to keep DLC’ers out of all other levels of Gov’t, just like their Cohorts the Red Neo Cons!

Aegrus,

I do not feel you are blunt, I do feel you are naive. As I stated in my first statement we do not live in a democracy, fixing the problem of the Plutocracy could never happen because our founding fathers in their wisdom made it so.  About the only thing the people can do to counteract corporate undue influence, would be to be aware and not patronize.  During the depression the people became more powerful but that has changed dramatically, ie trying to eliminate social security. 

As far as congress goes throw the
bums out, however most people may believe they are represented by pork barreling seniority so throwing them out may be impossible. As for the senate, it represents the elite and is supposed to. 

Propaganda, our legionary national news has been successful in directing public sentiment since WWI. Getting public sentiment against the steel unions was a nice appetizer for the so called news.  It has been so ever since.

Rule of law is absent to those in power,  accountability non existent, when impeachment is off the table one should see a clue, seems some people cannot not see it that way, so we have what we have. 

My point is we do not live in a democracy, when people call it such I have to call it as I see it.

Your vote for a president is the least important vote you can cast.  Note, carefully, that i didn’t say that it was unimportant.

While your city council, school board, and state representative cannot seriously affect national level politics, their affect on your daily life is great.  Moreover, presidents don’t come from nowhere.  If we want great national level leaders, then we’ll have to cultivate them.  And there are mechanisms in our system of governance that allow local politics to have a great affect at the national level if snowballed together.

For example, if every state passed the new California emissions law, then the federal government could not really sue to have the law overturned.  2/3 of the state legislatures tabling articles of impeachment force Congress to take the matter up.  Etc.

Your presidential vote won’t (statistically) change anything except how you feel about you place in the nation.  The same could be said for voting your conscience instead of your compromises.  But you had damned well better cast a vote for president…after you spend as much time looking into your local candidates as you spend breathlessly following the national horse race and vote your conscience or your compromises with them.

It is all about advantage, bribery, and rackets.  Screw this country.  Screw its stupid people.  Crookism needs suckers.  Capitalism needs smarts.  The crooks have jacked everything.  Kill them all.

By Anarcissie, August 22 at 3:45 pm #

As an individual voter, your vote in a presidential election has an infinitesimally small chance—that is, zero—of deciding the election.  You will not prevent McCain by voting for Obama, nor vice versa.  To gain any satisfaction from your vote, then, you should vote for someone you like or at least approve of, or who represents principles or ideas you believe in.
—————————————————————————-
I very much disagree with this. For me, at least, the purpose of voting is not to gain the personal good feeling of “making a statement” by voting for the candidate that most closely represents my political position. It is to excercise my power as a citizen to move the country in what I judge to be the right direction. That power may be very small, but when you reduce it from small to zero, you thereby also reduce democracy to zero, to a matter of making futile statements that nobody is paying attention to - which is exactly what many people here say it is. Moreover, I can multiply my democratic power insofar as I can persuade others to vote the same way I do. That is why I am here on TD. This is the way democracy is supposed to work, and why it can work so much better now that we have the Internet and sites like TD, where we can go to engage in 24-hour-a-day political dialogue with our fellow citizens.

Folktruther: ... Also, if one is in a state where the vote for the two major candidates aren’t close, there is no electoral cost for doing so.

It doesn’t matter what state you live in.  You will not decide the election.  A vote cast with the purpose of deciding the election is wasted (unless you’re on the Supreme Court).

If you vote at all, you might as well make it count by using to let people know what you believe in.

My reason for voting for McKinney would be because as far as I know, she doesn’t have blood on her hands.  Not many candidates can say that.

I’m with you in supporting Cynthia McKinney, Anarcissie.  It may be possible to develop a movement against the neocons who have seized control of both parties and the power system.  No matter who is ‘elected’ president by the money and media of the ruling class, the US power system will continue to drive the American population into the ground by maintaining and even increasing class inequality and is a danger to the entire world.

Also, if one is in a state where the vote for the two major candidates aren’t close, there is no electoral cost for doing so.

I largely agree with Sirota: there is too much power vested in the presidency. No human being can wield that sort of power and not be tempted, as it were, by the Dark Side.

I have a modest suggestion. I think the top three vote getters in the presidential election should share power. That is, the presidency should become a triumvirate, much like the old Roman republic. Any act of the executive branch would have to have the approval of all three executives.

Thus, in the 2004 elections, the presidents would have been Bush, Kerry, and (I think) Nader. The imperial president would tend to be counterbalanced by having to share power with his two strongest opponents.

Would a G W Bush be able to lie a country into war if he had to share executive power (and government intelligence data) with his two strongest opponents? I think you will agree this would be much less likely.

This change would of course require a constitutional amendment, which is a difficult process. But I think it would be a worthwhile change.

Sirota is right that we are getting way, way to close to presidency worship.

As an individual voter, your vote in a presidential election has an infinitesimally small chance—that is, zero—of deciding the election.  You will not prevent McCain by voting for Obama, nor vice versa.  To gain any satisfaction from your vote, then, you should vote for someone you like or at least approve of, or who represents principles or ideas you believe in.  In my case, I favor Cynthia McKinney, the Green Party candidate, because as far as I know she does not support and has not supported war and imperialism, as the others have.  I realize she won’t win, but I will leave a mark on the wall that says there was at least one person who didn’t drink the Kool-Aid.  My vote won’t be swallowed up in the darkness of a lesser evil.

As for the monarchical presidency, a lot of people, even the late William Buckley, complained about it, but it has a lot of popular support, and no one seems to have any idea how to reverse the trend.

Aegrus,  I am in agreement to you as to the proper role of the President.  I would add what I see as the most important role of the president, acting as our representative to the world, and all that implies.  I agree that most of the policy should be done by congressional means, with the president there to assist, smooth out differences, and keep congress as a whole focused on what is needed. 

Beyond any specific policy points or views, the main criteria I have for a president is intelligence, thoughtfulness and intellectual curiosity, the ability to compromise to achieve a greater goal, the vision to come up with novel solutions to big problems, and most importantly a desire to help improve the lot of everyone(globally), not just a privileged few.  All candidates fall short of this somehow, and most fall dismally short of this.  In this election I strongly feel that Obama comes closest to the mark, and honestly, I feel he is the closest to the mark I have seen among serious contenders in my adult lifetime.

Gore advocates what could be deemed a radical enough change, energy independance and an end to carbon emissions. Those may prove to be very high mountains considering we are still ruled to this day by fossil fuel giants. You are correct about the neocon threat. They have infiltrated the dimmos as well. I guess if you study political science we could see it was inevitable that eventually right would become left and left will become right.
Maybe four years of Mcsame will cause the upheaval we need. But how far must we fall before we have an epiphany? We might just pass hell on the way.
I just don’t see Barry in the role of messiah. Lets hope he doesn’t have to play it.

Big B, I admire your impatience with political bromides but I wasn’t aware that Al Gore advocated radical change.  His courage and dedication to fighting for change was adequately demonstrated by his compitulation to the Brooks Brothers Riot and the Supreme Court in preventing the counting of the Flordia votes.

The US ruling class has developed a Superpresidency to lead the US Superpower in its Wars on Terrorism abroad and a Democratic police state at home.  This is the deluding, spying on, imprisoning, torturing and murdering the AMerican people while maintaining Democratic institutions devoid of people power.  The historical process is led by the Gops with Dem leaders like Obama as complicit enablers.

It may be reasonable to vote for Obama over McCain, but what is really necessary is to mobilize the population against the neocons that support them both.  Both the Gop neocons and the Dem neocons.  They have seized control of both parties and the US power system and are driving the US population into the ground.

Time is ripe, Big B. It could be done if you work at it the right way. People are becoming more politically aware. It does take a little coaxing, but I think more Americans are active now than eight years ago.

The older I get, the more I think the “kooky” Al Gore may be right. The time for Radical change is now. We have transformed the nation practically overnite before, why can’t we do it now? I’ll tell you why, most people that don’t occupy the lunatic fringe still hold onto that most American of traits, WE DON"T LIKE CHANGE! In the past it has taken a severe national upheaval for Americans to truly come together and change the course of the nation. Those reasons have almost always (unfortunatly) been war.
Well, we’ve got a war, but it’s apparently not big enough.
I guess we need a bigger recession, a bigger debt, and a bigger war. More global warming(has anyone noticed how hot it’s been this summer?) higher gas prices, old people need to freeze to death this winter, and frogs need to fall out of the fucking sky and interrupt the goddamn super bowl. These events just might bring about the commitment to change that is sorley lacking the US.
Kurt Vonnegut said in one of his final books that an appropriate epitath for the human race would be “We could have saved ourselves, but we were too damn lazy, and cheap!”
Once again we are being forced by the powers that be to choose between two candidates that represent the status quo. Guess I’ll be heading to the cliff with the rest of the lemmings

That’s a nice way to look at it, Gmnost. I agree very much.

I do wonder, though, what criteria do you have for a president, though? Really, I think the president should just be there to help guide legislation that’s important, and to just be a figurehead otherwise. Our state representatives should be the ones who adapt most ideas into public and federal policy. If only more people were active in the spheres of political discourse… *sigh* We’ll get there, though, through patience and perseverance.

I support the basic premise of this article that we have a lot more opportunity for change and influence through our local representatives and involvement in local politics.  I can’t say I disagree with that.  Maybe a presidency isn’t really needed.  I would probably be on board with changing to a more parliamentary system.  However, for better or worse the presidency exists and is not likely to go anywhere soon.  The president is not all powerful, but its still a very important position.  They are the most powerful figure in shaping foreign policy and they are our face to the world.  That is no unimportant thing and should be given a lot of weight and importance.  Because of the importance to the people as a nation it takes on a more universal appearance.  I can’t go on sites like this rallying about city council choices.  The national news can’t report on them either.  The presidential election is the one election common to us as an entire nation, so of course its going to get a lot of attention.  It also influences a lot of local things like roads and police via federal funding, local troops going to fight in wars, how laws are enforced by federal agencies, etc.  Its important.  I live in pretty liberal community and my local representation is pretty good, still they can’t control a lot of stuff at the national level.  I wish they could but they can’t.  While I agree that the local is very important, it doesn’t discount the importance of choosing the president either.  Since that choice is common to the entire nation, its going to take on a bigger status.  It affects all localities, not just mine.

Leefeller, how did I take your comments out of context?  There isn’t any mentioning of fixing the problem, or activating citizens to pull together against the plutocracy.

Maybe I’m blunt, but I don’t see why people have to feel like victims. Such feelings have never helped anyone before.

Every country, other than ours until recently, which had a presidential system form of government has devolved into totalitarianism.

I have to agree with BigB that the Framers were, by past experience, Royalists at heart.

Rick Hertzberg in his book ‘Politics’ lays out in some detail the inherent pitfalls of the presidential system.  He makes a very convincing case that as long we are under it, every ‘adjustment’ is merely postponing the inevitable death of our so-called democracy.

I’ve read that by way of being at war, hot or cold, for 67 years the office of the president has accrued overreaching power. Any attempt to curb it is immediately thwarted in the name of National Security - which also provides a convenient ‘cover’ for keeping secret information, behind the scenes skulduggery and anything else that needs to see the light of day to be combatted.

Aim higher? Sure. Aim wherever you want, but prevent a McCain presidency by voting for Obama. You’re voting against neo-conservative fascism. Even Howard Zinn will be voting for Obama. Make progress wherever you can, even if it is choosing between the lesser two evils. Be self-righteous if you must, but Obama will be better for America than McCain, and no one is in the bull-pen for Nader right now.

Aegrus,

Taking my comments out of context seems to have served you well, as has eluding truth.

“Patriotism has come to mean blind support for failed leaders.”

Bill Moyers said that in a speech last year and it approprietly describes both the blind allegence of the bushies and the kool-aid guzzling Obamaphiles. I have a word of advice to Barry’s bandwagon riders, just because it’s different doesn’t make it better.
While Barry has taken a pragmatic approach concerning the war and spying on his fellow citizens (if by pragmatic you mean caving into the neoliberal clinton loving wingnuts in the party) he has seen his support among liberals begin to wane. If he doesn’t get it back, he will lose.

aegrus
“If you lack enthusiasm for progress, it won;t happen”

Well thanks coach! I have not heard that kind of drivel since basketball practice in college.
Here’s another one for ya,
“If you believe, you will achieve!”
Well, we liberals started out believing in Barry, but then he sold us out on votes to continue funding the war and to continue violating the 4th amendment by spying on Americans. He has been the beggar to his own demise.
Is he a better choice than Mcsame? Of course.
But shouldn’t we be aiming higher?

Our forefathers ALL said: keep your guns in case of the Gov; they all believed in the Word; in Ecc where it states: there is a time to kill; I do NOT believe they meant it in other countries at all but in case it was necessary here in the USA, for the Gov. Our nation was set up to be run FOR THE PEOPLE: for what was BEST for the majority of common man; “all men are created equal”; went out the door when the same folks who ran the huge plantations, etc, bought & paid for our political groups a long time ago. Woodrow Wilson, Pres ww1, lamented the fact that we were no longer a land of the free, or even of majority vote, but rather under the rules & dictates of a few dominent men. THAT is dictatorship; these folks claim “truth is relavent” which means they feel they are gods, & nothing they say is to be challenged; and they can do whatever they want to do without being taken to court; and it has been seen repeatedly that this is the case. What you have is a bunch of criminals & crooks who ROB the people: this nation was set up for all “taxable” items to be paid for by Big Business profits; instead, WE are paying Corp’s taxes; & share holders come 1st; not the people. This extends to Govenors, down to counties, & now into cities. If ANYONE anywhere anytime anyplace objects to ANY of this being WRONG, stop paying your taxes; they are NOT broke; just like the WMD were NOT found in Iraq; neither are they broke. There plans for us are NOT for good, but for evil. Following the SAME PATTERN as in Germany, during Hitler’s day; REMEMBER WELL: they brought top Nazi’s here to study HOW it was done: and THIS is working in USA today. Be warned.

I’ll tell you what, my stomach turns whenever I see this hopelessness and despondency from Americans about politics. Why do Americans find every reason to be defeatist? Why does anyone go around saying “Oh, we’re not in a democracy anymore” or “humans are weak, democracy doesn’t work” as if it is self-evident?

I believe these statements are self-serving. Ways to separate oneself from humanity. Things to enable one’s own lack of will and self-worth. These are depreciative comments, which do not change anything. Observations for the disenchanted and fence-sitters.

If you lack enthusiasm for progress, it won’t happen.

Flaunting the concept that we are a democracy should turn any thinking citizen’s stomach.  We live in an elitist plutocracy, were news is Propaganda and they the special ones, do as they want, the general citizen get the ever waning left overs. 

As far as the president goes, special interests will guide him in his decisions until the next president is selected by the very same people.

In US Impeachment is off the table, even in Pakistan they forced out their self proclaimed king, dost say much for alleged US democracy. Seems not only impeachment is off the table we have seen taken off the table accountability, integrity and human compassion.

In his upcoming book, “You Can’t Be President,” journalist John MacArthur ponders the depressing answers to these kinds of questions, reminding readers of Alexis de Tocqueville’s 19th-century writing.

“It is in vain to summon a people, which has been rendered so dependent on the central power, to choose from time to time the representatives of that power,” he observed. “This rare and brief exercise of their free choice, however important it may be, will not prevent them from gradually losing the faculties of thinking, feeling and acting for themselves, and thus gradually falling below the level of humanity.”

Yes, this is prescient and should be acknowledged as true and a warning to us.
We have not been diligent, but rather lazy, as guardians of humanities greatest accomplishment; the right to choose our future.  Ideologically it sounds great, but it ignores human nature:  We are weak and prone to fear; thus making us vulnerable to manipulation by those predisposed to power. 
Democracy will never be satisfying to those of us with an independent mind and a will to freedom of thought.  This theory will never be complete.  It is incumbent on us to continue to strive for true freedom:  Freedom that can never be a matter of permission!

I take umbridge with the opinion that our founding fathers were aware of the dangers of having a single “regal” ruler. They did not “constitutionally constrain” the office of the chief exectutive. What they failed to realize was that a singluar presidency was just a replacement for a King. Our wealthy forfathers who wrote the constitution, and were responsible for some of the most moving writings about the nature of self governmant, were themselves children of feudal Europe. This scewed many of them (not all) to view a singular exectutive as nessessary in order to provide the “common people” with an image to look to for the leadership that they, as common, poor, uneducated people so desperatly needed (them being common poor and uneducated, thus being incapable of self determination). Ben Franklin and James Madison warned their fellow revolutionaries that the office of a presidency would mearly be a replacement for the King.
Sort of hit that nail on the head, didn’t they?
As we have seen over the last two centuries, the true nature of man is not to live free in brotherhood with his fellow man. As each successive president consolidates even more power to the exectutive office they help to create a de-facto King. The consolidation of power, exectutive, legislative, and judicial, in the same hands, is the very definition of tierany. (I’d like to claim that one, but it was James Madison) The system that was created over 200 years ago by the founding fathers was flawed from the begining. Originally giving the power of the vote only to landowners (the wealthy) and denying representation to the poor and women, and denying humanity to blacks, the system has not come very far. While women and blacks can vote now (a relativley recent development) we still find ourselves ruled by that same original feudal model that was set up to heap the trappings of power to the already wealthy and connected (by the already wealthy and connected). Oh I know there are examples of some men rising out of poverty to positions of power. But those stories are a few, and the axiom of birth determining your place in society is practically universal.
Our founding fathers could not possibly have forseen a George Bush or any other man that would blatantly wipe his ass with the constitution. That’s one of the reasons that Thomas Jefferson once recommended a constitutional convention every ten years or so. He also recommended a revolution every once in a while.
We are in desperate need of both.

I know people out there will bitch about my true nature of man comments. I sit here among my history books trying to find an example of a civilization that did not rely on the oppression of some segment of its population for the gratification of a small ruling class. I am still looking.

“Dana Nelson calls presidentialism: our paternalistic view that presidents are godlike saviors—and therefore democracy’s only important figures.”
So true, David. Todays waste of breath was OPB talking of the importance of the First lady’s attire and the importance this has on culture. Really cerebral, huh?
Before a voter should be able to cast that important vote maybe the voter should pass a short test, showing who is governor and secretary of state and US Senators from his/her state.
But with no support from the Media what is one to expect? As I have stated Ad Nausium..When you must choose from Deedle Dum or Deedle Dee what is truly the difference?
Another thinking man’s article, David.

Note: The Republicans know how to win elections. The Democrats do not. McCain will win in a landslide. He’s already moving ahead, and his lead will increase until by October, the election will be a moot question. This has nothing to do with reason.