Top Leaderboard, Site wide
Shop the Truthdig Gift Guide 2014
December 18, 2014
Truthdig: Drilling Beneath the Headlines
Sign up for Truthdig's Email NewsletterLike Truthdig on FacebookFollow Truthdig on TwitterSubscribe to Truthdig's RSS Feed

Get Truthdig's headlines in your inbox!


Go West, Young Han
Weather Extremes Rise as Planet Gets Hotter and Colder






Truthdig Bazaar more items

 
Report

Obama by Default

Email this item Email    Print this item Print    Share this item... Share

Posted on Apr 4, 2012
AP/Charles Dharapak

Republican presidential candidate Mitt Romney.

By Robert Scheer

The Republicans are a sick joke, and their narrow ideological stupidity has left rational voters no choice in the coming presidential election but Barack Obama. With Ron Paul out of it and warmongering hedge fund hustler Mitt Romney the likely Republican nominee, the GOP has defined itself indelibly as the party of moneyed greed and unfettered imperialism.

It is with chilling certainty that one can predict that a single Romney appointee to the Supreme Court would seal the coup of the 1 percent that already is well on its way toward purchasing the nation’s political soul. Romney is the quintessential Citizens United super PAC candidate, a man who has turned avarice into virtue and comes to us now as a once-moderate politician transformed into the ultimate prophet of imperial hubris, blaming everyone from the Chinese to laid-off American workers for our problems. Everyone, that is, except the Wall Street-dominated GOP, which midwifed the Great Recession under George W. Bush and now seeks to blame Obama for the enormous deficit spawned by the party’s wanton behavior.

Without a militarily sophisticated enemy anywhere on the planet, the United States, thanks to the Bush-bloated budget, now spends almost as much on defense as the rest of the world combined. Yet the GOP honchos dare claim they are for small government even as their chosen candidate champs at the bit to go to war with Iran.

They obviously learned nothing from the disasters of Bush the Second, who hijacked the tragedy of 9/11 to launch the most wasteful orgy of military spending in U.S. history in his failed effort to take out an al-Qaida enemy that had no significant military arsenal. That enemy was later eliminated by Obama, whom the Republicans still obstinately refuse to credit for accomplishing what Bush failed to. Can you imagine the explosion of preening self-congratulation that would have resulted if a GOP president had done the deed?

The red-ink deficits that had been stanched under Bill Clinton came to gush uncontrollably because of the swollen military budgets, compounded by the severe costs of the recession that occurred on Bush’s watch.

Advertisement

Square, Site wide
But the Republicans refuse to take ownership of the collapse resulting from their longstanding advocacy of radical financial deregulation that led to the derivatives bubble, hundreds of trillions of dollars of toxic junk, now a permanent, nightmarish feature of the world’s economy. Romney, who made his fortune through such financial finagling, even has the effrontery to call for more of the same and blame Obama’s tepid efforts at establishing some sane speed limits for the financial highway as a cause of our ongoing crisis.

So insanely gullible are Republican voters that they buy Mitt’s line that bailing out the auto industry to save the heart of America’s legendary industrial base was an example of big-government waste. Yet to them the almost unimaginable sum spent on the Wall Street bailout represents prudent small-government fiscal responsibility.

The incumbent president has his failings, but compared to Mitt Romney he is a paradigm of considered and compassionate thought. As Obama put it in a speech before a journalism group this week, we are saddled with a national debt “that has grown over the last decade, primarily as a result of two wars, two massive tax cuts, and an unprecedented financial crisis, [and] that will have to be paid down.” But instead of dealing with the causes of that debt, Romney has called for an increase in military spending, continued tax breaks for the rich and reversal of the very limited restraints on corporate greed that Obama managed to get through Congress. He has endorsed the House-passed Paul Ryan budget, which, as Obama noted, even Newt Gingrich once derided as “radical” and an effort at “right-wing social engineering.”

Such radicalism leaves Obama as the “moderate” choice in the coming election, defending centrist programs that Republicans in the past helped originate. Indeed, the big attack on Obama will involve what the Republicans call Obamacare—which was modeled in every important respect on Romneycare, enacted when the GOP candidate was governor of Massachusetts.

The overarching lesson of this primary season is that Romney and the Republicans he seeks to win over are incapable of embracing the very moderation that, particularly in the golden era of Dwight Eisenhower, defined the party. Instead, they are now a reckless force bent on destroying the essential social contract that has been the basis of America’s economic and social progress.

As Obama said Tuesday in addressing the editors and reporters: “... We’re going to have to answer a central question as a nation. ... Can we succeed as a country where a shrinking number of people do exceedingly well, while a growing number struggle to get by? ... This is not just another run-of-the-mill political debate. ... It’s the defining issue of our time.”


New and Improved Comments

If you have trouble leaving a comment, review this help page. Still having problems? Let us know. If you find yourself moderated, take a moment to review our comment policy.

Shenonymous's avatar

By Shenonymous, April 14, 2012 at 2:09 pm Link to this comment

kulu, April 14 at 7:45 am – A Russian view on capitalism?  Veddy
intahrrresting.  Since the guvamint controls everything I wonder
what Putin has to do with any RT news?

Report this
Shenonymous's avatar

By Shenonymous, April 14, 2012 at 2:03 pm Link to this comment

heterochromatic, April 14 at 12:23 pm - that made my day!  Now I
can do my taxes laughing all the while. Yeah, I am one of those
procrastinators.  Won’t get much back if anything, but if there is
our poor guvamint could use it a bit longer. LOL

Report this

By heterochromatic, April 14, 2012 at 1:23 pm Link to this comment

She—- the moonie is just some idiotic jerkoff who delights in making personal
and racists attacks and then likes to bitch about people returning fire…....


treat it dismissively as coming from a goat-blower and hope that it gets around to
offering the occasional bit of sensible comment.

Report this
Shenonymous's avatar

By Shenonymous, April 14, 2012 at 1:03 pm Link to this comment

moonraven, April 14 at 10:08 am - “Shit, man, I better start shilling for
Mittenhead!”  Start?  LOL

Report this
moonraven's avatar

By moonraven, April 14, 2012 at 11:14 am Link to this comment

Korky:

Since exit polls are ALWAYS rigged here in latin America, I suspect they are in gringolandia, too.

The way they do it here is twofold:

1.  A polling entity just makes up the polls to favor the person who offered the most money.

2.  A polling entity sends its pollsters to areas where one candidate or political party traditional dominates the vote, and aska the folks leaving the polling places how they voted. 

Bogus as hell, and those pollsters make damn good money—not the peons who do the lefwork, of course, but the OWNERS of the polling companies.

Report this
moonraven's avatar

By moonraven, April 14, 2012 at 11:08 am Link to this comment

S hennyagins wrote:

“moonravennie you are rather vile yourself.  If you really are a redman,
then you are a sorry racist example. Do you think I care a shit if you
vote?  I don’t.  You seem excessively flooded with self-righteous
indignation.  Since you are a minority, if the Republicans have their
way, you won’t have to worry about not voting anyway.  Your right to
vote would be revoked. “

Aside from being a racist personal attack indicating them I am not a credit to my race, it makes no snse because if he/she/it doesn’t care if I vote or not, why keep screaming insults at me because I don’t vote?

If the republicans get in, will they not only cancel my write to vote, but my obligation to carry a US passport?

Shit, man, I better start shilling for Mittenhead!

Report this
kulu's avatar

By kulu, April 14, 2012 at 8:45 am Link to this comment

Leefeller,

You might want to watch the program “Capital Account” on RT a few times. It is entertaining and very informative on what is going on in the economy.

Her’s the link:-

http://rt.com/programs/capital-account/

Report this

By - bill, April 14, 2012 at 1:19 am Link to this comment

While desperately trying to get some sleep before an early-starting 99% non-violent direct action training conclave which I had forgotten that I had agreed to attend the thought popped into my mind that I may not have understood John’s ‘MPG per vehicle ton’ proposal.

Let’s say that two vehicles each get 40 MPG, one weighing 1 ton and one weighing 2 tons, and therefore the first getting 40 MPG/ton and the second 20 MPG/ton.  If the proposal is that the second be charged more per gallon of gas that may make a degree of sense (since presumably the manufacturer could have made it get better gas mileage had the car been lighter), but I wouldn’t consider it all that important to so discriminate (especially considering the fact that the technology in the latter would be in my opinion worth encouraging).

My earlier (and considerably less literal) interpretation of the proposal was that if a 1-ton vehicle got 40 MPG and a 2-ton vehicle got 20 MPG they’d be charged the same per-gallon gas price - which I believe makes no sense at all (why give the vehicle with far higher gas consumption any additional encouragement, save - as John mentioned - in very special cases of need?).  Worse yet, since the 2-ton vehicle could easily be designed to get more like 30 MPG (because that better approximates the relationship between vehicle weight and gas mileage) it would get a LOWER per-gallon price than the 40-MPG 1-ton vehicle.

So apologies, John, if I misinterpreted your proposal.  If you’d care to clarify the reasoning behind it I’m all ears.

Report this

By Cliff Carson, April 13, 2012 at 8:35 pm Link to this comment

By Gary Mont, April 13 at 3:20 pm

“How could one be certain that the list of names was both authentic and composed of people who did not vote, so that it would appear as though they did indeed vote - for your candidate - should anyone look at the lists?”

Gary, I have always thought there should be an easy way to validate the votes cast, who cast them, and how they voted.  And there is.  It may sound complicated but in this electronic age I assure you it is not.
 
Let me advance a scenario:

All must register to vote to be eligible to vote.
An E-Card with a photo will be given those who are registered once the card is proofed.  The card will be serialized and the photo likewise to connect the photo SN and the card SN.  A Database will be accomplished for all registered proven voters with a valid card.

A voter presents his card to the precinct worker.  The SN and photo is displayed on a screen and compared to the cards issued Database.
The precinct worker verifies the validity.

All voting machines will be configured such that a vote cannot be made without the E-Card inserted and read.  A camera will photo the voter as the voting takes place (While the E-Card is in the machine).

The E-Card will be coded with the vote selections made at the machine.  And the vote entry will contain the Card SN and the camera photo.

The voter reviews his selections and either accepts or rejects the screen display.  On acceptance of a display a print out is effected and the E-Card is removed by the voter and taken along with the printout to a voting precinct official and the updated card inserted into a card reader.

The vote is displayed and compared to the printout.  If the same, the voter signs the printout and gives it to the precinct worker. The vote is recorded in the Database with SN and photo.  The original printout is micro filed.

From there the card is taken by the voter to be read into three independent card readers - Republican, Democrat, and Independent.  When completed the voter retains the card until the next election.

This means there are 6 independent databases that should contain identical information - the voting machine data base, the display print out database, the Precinct database, the Republican
database, the Democratic database, and the Independent Database.

When the voting is over the six databases are independently ordered by SN and the vote tallied independently.  After this task the summations are compared.

If there is a discrepancy on the summation of any of the six BD’s, a routine is run over those DB’s to identify which SN numbers are different in which DB.

The problem Printout SN is pulled from the precinct DB and compared to the problem DB SN, the Precinct DB printout database and a decision is rendered.
 
That is a view from 50,000 feet.  The detail minutia and the security safeguards will be developed by those people who know a whole lot more about computer software than me.

Report this

By - bill, April 13, 2012 at 6:17 pm Link to this comment

If only the time and energy put into this word-fest could be harnessed for good…

1.  There is a back-up that can shed considerable light upon whether on average votes are being counted as cast and whether voters are actually turning out to vote:  exit polling (whoops - wrote that before getting to Korky’s recent post on that subject).  Not that my faith in the corporate-controlled media is great, but ANYONE can do exit-polling (and some outside that media do).

The bottom line is that either votes are usually counted or they are not.  If they are (as evidenced by, e.g., exit polling), then both boycotts and voting make sense, according to one’s view of which seems more likely to achieve one’s goals.  If they aren’t AND nobody (e.g., exit-pollers) effectively exposes that fact, neither voting nor boycotting makes any sense.  If they aren’t being counted with at least moderate accuracy AND this fact can be exposed sufficiently to convince a large percentage of our population, then the discussion moves to what we need to do about that.

2.  A related issue (which could suggest that votes ARE being at least to some degree counted) is why The Powers That Be spend so much money touting their race-horses.  Some of us believe this is because they’re depending upon this engrossing political theater (which in some ways works even better than a war) to keep us from understanding that while the votes are being counted it doesn’t make a dime’s worth of difference which major-party candidate actually gets elected - but even then we’re divided on what voting or non-voting strategy is best to use to address this.

3.  It’s the height of narcissism to believe that anyone is being paid to post at TD - not only because if anyone here WERE being paid they’d obviously be being OVER-paid (because TD, at least in threads like this, appears to be a write-only medium where virtually no one’s opinion ever changes) but because the influence of TD comments upon anyone outside its tiny in-bred community is likely nil (at least I certainly can’t see any:  if anyone has actual evidence to the contrary it would be at least marginally encouraging - e.g., that myriads of silent on-lookers raptly scour threads like these for enlightenment which they then disseminate to the real world).

4.  Whatever the reasons for their beliefs, the posters here strike me as sincere in them however misguided and incompetently-bolstered I may think most of them are.  Dismissing those who disagree with you as in some way insincere or otherwise intrinsically unworthy of consideration is engaging in decidedly Bush-league behavior (“You’re either with us or you’re with…”).  One can be just as derogatory picking upon substantive points of disagreement or refusal to engage on specifics (and I frequently am, though by and large don’t find the points here sufficiently interesting or substantive to bother with:  I’d have made an exception for the curious touting of low gas prices - arising entirely from low gas TAXES - as some kind of progressive achievement, but Korky has taken care of that already).

5.  Whoops - nearing the end of my FIFO scan I’ve hit John’s well-meant but misguided suggestion that ‘MPG per ton of vehicle’ is a reasonable way to address unnecessary gas consumption.  He can be forgiven for obviously not understanding how vehicle mass affects gas economy, I guess:  such a pricing mechanism would mean that drivers of heavier vehicles would pay significantly LESS per gallon than drivers of the lighter vehicles that we need to cut back seriously on overall consumption would pay.

What we need to do is encourage people to use less gas, period, not less gas per ton of vehicle.  If they need a heavy vehicle for certain specific purposes, they should be encouraged (through gas or general carbon taxation) to use something else for the rest of their driving.

Report this
Gary Mont's avatar

By Gary Mont, April 13, 2012 at 4:20 pm Link to this comment

Manufacturing legitimate Votes out of thin air.

Well damn it, now my curiosity has got an itch.

Exactly what would it take - (assuming that Mark was right and the current system prevents the creation of votes out of thin air) - to be able to manage a slush fund of non-voter names one could add to the tally that would compute as real votes by real people and not be seen as an over-vote number-wise.

Who would need to be paid off?

How could one be certain that the list of names was both authentic and composed of people who did not vote, so that it would appear as though they did indeed vote - for your candidate - should anyone look at the lists?

In short, just how difficult would it be to create a situation where one could indeed create a large number of votes out of thin air to prove popularity via numbers for a chosen candidate when you control the vote counters, without the possibility of normal scrutiny grokking the ruse??

Could it be as simple as producing a large number of fake voter registrations containing names of known disenfranchised voters??

I’m pretty darn certain that the complete lack of a paper trail will aid this effort tremendously.

And remember, we’re talking about having access to nearly unlimited funds - the never quite empty American tax-payer’s pocket - so money is no obstacle and the sky is pretty much the limit cash wise to the point where even bribing and/or eliminating a usually honest person can be accomodated easily.

Any takers?

Fair Warning.

If someone here does offer a simple solution to this challenge that merely takes money to initiate, I’m gonna state something to the effect that - “If it can be figurted out by a bunch of bloggers, it can certainly be figured out by a million dollar a day fascist think tank like ALEC.

Report this
Leefeller's avatar

By Leefeller, April 13, 2012 at 3:58 pm Link to this comment

Cliff, Fyi; I saw your link and it seems we would be prudent to stop this rape of our economy and war against the people of this nation and others, my economic knowledge is minimal, any contributions on the subject I may offer would be steeped in ignorance, maybe I should become a Republican? Occasionally I read Krugman and other Economists accepting their comments and evaluations best I can.

Report this
John Best asks,

By John Best asks, "What IS Progress"?, April 13, 2012 at 3:42 pm Link to this comment

Cliff, I went to the link.  I’ve seen the data in other places.  The pattern seems to be to borrow against the credit of the country, then pass the contracts out among your friends.  And of course let a few crumbs fall to those special interests who can make trouble. 

Borrowing is fine if you invest in something productive with a long term return to the economy, but the rate of return on munitions is probably negative.

Report this

By Cliff Carson, April 13, 2012 at 3:35 pm Link to this comment

Mark E. Smith, April 13 at 11:48 am

stated:

“These are the same Democrats who believe that despite starting more wars, giving more money to the rich, and taking away more civil rights than Bush ever did, Obama is less evil than Bush.”

Mark,

Whoever told you Obama started more wars than Bush, you need to call them a liar.

Whoever told you that Obama gave more money to the rich than Bush, you need to also call them a liar.

And finally whoever said Obama took away more civil rights from you and me than Bush, please call them a liar also.

Look at the chart I provided for the financial matters and if you can’t see it in the chart, I will give you more sources and charts, if you will go read them.  I wonder if anyone went to see this chart I provided.  Usually no one goes and reads links so most of the time it is useless to post them.

On another thread currently running on this site one of the commenters stated flatly that what I claimed was in the article was nowhere to be found, so I gave the page number and the location on the page where what she said wasn’t there, is truly there for anyone to behold.

I asked the denier to go back and read it and asked the other readers on the thread to go read it and verify who was truthful.  Not a single commenter has commented to date that they went to the link and read what I said was there and what the other person said was definitely not there.

When you don’t go read a link there is no way you can tell whether what I or anyone else provides a link to is correct or not.  And it is an indication of not wanting to be confused by the facts.

Look at the chart and lets have a calm discussion.

Report this
Leefeller's avatar

By Leefeller, April 13, 2012 at 1:22 pm Link to this comment

Mark may have got the old heaving hoe from his boiler plate Republican hot water tank?

‘Unsubscribing from this discussion.’ Defined: Taking his balls and heading home?

Report this

By heterochromatic, April 13, 2012 at 1:08 pm Link to this comment

——-Unsubscribing from this discussion.——-
thanks for that….you can more profitably spoend your time feeling sad that the
marvelous Muammar is no more and not providing great governance.

Report this
John Best asks,

By John Best asks, "What IS Progress"?, April 13, 2012 at 12:58 pm Link to this comment

Per Smark Myth, “Despite the personal attacks by those who can’t refute my arguments,”  well, you never made a good case for your assertion, and the name for you is ‘the pot calling the kettle black’. 

Vote people.  Don’t think it’ll accomplish a damn thing either way, and don’t let it satisfy your urge to go do something political.  It’s a futile gesture, and the system has serious problems, but at least in local elections, you can still affect policy.

Report this
Mark E. Smith's avatar

By Mark E. Smith, April 13, 2012 at 12:48 pm Link to this comment

The funny thing is that most of the people here who call themselves Democrats and blame the Republicans, particularly Ronald Reagan, for everything, are “Reagan Democrats” who voted for Reagan.

These are the same Democrats who believe that if Al Gore had become President in 2000 instead of Bush, the corporate powers that had forced him to name right-wing Republican Joe Lieberman as his running mate, wouldn’t have controlled his agenda.

These are the same people who believe that if John Kerry, the billionaire who helped Bush get a second term by breaking both his promises to the Democrats like me who had donated to him and voted for him, by resigning early and not bothering to ensure that the votes were counted, he would have kept some of his other promises.

These are the same Democrats who believe that despite starting more wars, giving more money to the rich, and taking away more civil rights than Bush ever did, Obama is less evil than Bush. They apparently define evil as, “being a Republican,” and less evil as, “being a Democrat and being farther to the right than the Republicans.”

Despite the personal attacks by those who can’t refute my arguments, it was the Democrats who were in power and who supported and voted for everything that Bush did and who took impeachment of Bush and Cheney off the table, and it is the Democrats who are still refusing to prosecute Bush and Cheney. Why would oligarchs prosecute their fellow oligarchs for doing the same things that they do?

Yes, the political party operatives ignore rational arguments and devote themselves to personal attacks, but only because they have no rational arguments. Their job is to help the corporations get out the vote for the corporate-funded duopoly that favors covporations over people and to persuade people to vote for their own oppression.

And some people will vote. Hitler held elections and people voted. Stalin held elections and people voted. So naturally US Americans believe that voting is a way to participate in the political process, a voice in government, and an instrument of democracy.

I still have hope. Despite the good Germans who voted for him, Hitler’s Nazi regime was defeated. Despite the millions in the Soviet Union who voted for him, Stalin’s regime eventually fell. And despite those US Americans who vote for this Democratic/Republican capitalist imperialist system, this empire too is bankrupts, both morally and fiscally, and it also will fail. All cancers, i.e., systems based on unlimited growth, eventually fail, but unfortunately they do so by killing off their hosts.

Unsubscribing from this discussion.

Report this
John Best asks,

By John Best asks, "What IS Progress"?, April 13, 2012 at 12:44 pm Link to this comment

Warning, off topic post follows…..

Lee, on ‘gas pigs’, I propose size doesn’t matter.  It’s MPG per ton of vehicle which is important.  Also, if a guy in a small Honda drives like a maniac since his last fill-up, the MPG goes down with respect to the running average, so, unless the buy had a good damn reason for being in such a hurry, I say penalize the bastard. 

It pisses me off doubly when some yay-hoo drives an Escalade or Hummer in an intimidating fashion, simultaneously showing off and risking everybody in a small car.  My view is if they’re going to drive in a way that puts everybody else at risk, make ‘em pay.  Heck, using Republican philosophy…..why should they get the entertainment of scaring the rest of of for free?  Nobody should get anything for free should they? 

But seriously, awareness of MPG per ton of vehicle would drive Detroit in the right direction.  And, a factor could easily be built in for classes of vehicles or drivers with special needs.  Handicap van, farm truck, delivery van, etc.  Just add another division to the department of motor vehicles and the IRS.

Report this
Leefeller's avatar

By Leefeller, April 13, 2012 at 12:01 pm Link to this comment

Damn, Korky,... you sound a lot like the late Rodney Dangerfield!

Come on Korky, I do not know if this was one of your best points;.... though best points would seem relative to perception;.... asking Anarchists to unite and vote to not vote was probably the best hooting humorass point I have seen in a aardvarks age?

Aardvarks live to be quit old you know,  like dogs aardvarks are mans best friend, though it can be quite a choir house breaking them! It has been reported aardvarks don’t vote too, so one can surmise aardvarks may be anthill anarchists?

Report this
Leefeller's avatar

By Leefeller, April 13, 2012 at 11:41 am Link to this comment

Cliff,

Ronald Regan seems to be a poster boy for both parties on by his actions and the other for his great acting.

Have you seen ALEC has some detractors from its manipulative ‘I am not a Lobby” Kochness?

John, Gas Pigs are anyone driving a bigger car than mine?

Actually, the price of fuel(Diesel)  has gone up quite high and faster compared to gas, guess I need to find an electric truck and electric farm tractors?

Geez, I have been pissing everyone off on the road, driving my Diesel like one of those Honda Prissy cars. I discovered if I do not press the throttle down and drive my truck at idle, I can get 35 to 40 MPG, just takes me a hell of a lot longer to get home and I suppose the guys honking there horns behind me too.

Report this
John Best asks,

By John Best asks, "What IS Progress"?, April 13, 2012 at 11:25 am Link to this comment

Korky, apologies for being naturally long winded and responding to a select group of posters.  ‘Green party’ caught my eye, so here goes. 

I urge you to fight for a contract for your politicians, legally binding, and incorporating ideas such as those Gary Mont has offered.  Get the money out.  Public service should be no place to advance the fortune of your friends or family.  If and only if the Green Party makes progress along these lines will I think about changing my registration status, which is: No PARTY AFFILIATION.  That’s what it ways on my registration card, in caps just like that. 

You probably have a false impression about Shenonymouses opinion on gas prices, but here’s a gasoline idea:  we have computers in the cars already.  We have transponders, bluetooth, speedpass, WiFi, OnStar etc.  Put them together, the cars computer and a communication link and have your cars computer talk to the pump at the gas station.  Then set the price of gas according to a simple formula that takes into account your vehicle weight, average gas mileage, and a penalty for ‘lead footing’ since the last fill up.  Gas pigs pay more.

Report this

By Korky Day, April 13, 2012 at 10:35 am Link to this comment

Some other commenters here still are ignoring my best points.

Nevertheless, here’s a new point: 
Do the vote-boycotters claim that “exit polls” are rigged, too?  Maybe they’d like to do some actual work and conduct exit polls themselves, though I realize that the mainstream media might ignore them.  They could tell us, though, on TruthDig.

If the other commenters here want to be more persuasive, they should realize that brevity is appreciated and respected.

Report this

By Korky Day, April 13, 2012 at 10:27 am Link to this comment

Shenonymous writes as though high gasoline prices were bad.  To the extent that they drive down consumption, those high prices benefit the environment and all of us who depend on it.  Many of us in the Green Party see that and thus favour sharply increased fossil fuel taxes.  The Green voter, however, can look forward to savings in other areas to compensate, such as cutting military spending in half.  Obama never campaigned for president as anything other than a hawk.

Report this
Shenonymous's avatar

By Shenonymous, April 13, 2012 at 7:51 am Link to this comment

Leefeller, April 13 at 6:28 am - They must have read Lysistrata -
it is a hilarious cautionary tale about one woman’s determination to
end The Peloponnesian War. Lysistrata convinces the her sisters under
the skin to withhold sex from their husbands and lovers to force them
to strike a bargain for peace.

Report this

By Cliff Carson, April 13, 2012 at 7:35 am Link to this comment

http://zfacts.com/p/318.html

This Sheer article is dead on correct but there is so much disinformation out there that it is hard to cut through all the fog to arrive at the “truth”.

The link takes you to a chart that very clearly illustrates what has occurred since Reagan’s trickle down economics, a disastrous course adopted by our Government that brought about where we are today.  It was a Republican Plan sold to the American people that has driven this country to the edge.

Consider that Regan is the all time GOP hero.

If you will go to this link instead of just commenting on it to side with your favorite criminal party, you will notice the effect on the National debt brought about by the policies of “let the rich get richer because it will create a trickle down of increased jobs and benefits for all”, in other words - prosperity for all.

What has actually occurred is that the prosperity has been reserved for the richest of the rich and the fall-out is that common Americans are sliding into desperation at an accelerated clip.  This the Republican Party is trying desperately to pin on the Democrats and would you believe it - the victims.

Notice particularly the green line in the graph.  That line projects where America would be today if we hadn’t drank the Republican - nee Reagan - Kool-Aid.

The Republican Party has been a disaster for America, but as long as their money can buy enough propaganda to convince you otherwise, conditions will only continue to get uglier.

Report this
Leefeller's avatar

By Leefeller, April 13, 2012 at 7:28 am Link to this comment

When I was the older brother of a sister who demanded constant attention, Sis was like an annoying fly, so I would upset her in some mischievous way, so as a ploy my sister used,(for what reason I never knew) was to hold here breath until she turned blue, though did find it amusing! One of her other great ploys was to give older brother the silent treatment, guess I was like the Republican getting what I wanted?

In Africa, women mass protested by withholding sex from their prospective mates, in-order to get the fighting to stop, supposedly it worked well and was effective, thus peace covered the land, it seems the men preferred one thing over the other?

Three options for the organized apathy crowd, two of which could work in mass, one eventuality did work, so there you go, which one seems the most viable?

Report this
John Best asks,

By John Best asks, "What IS Progress"?, April 13, 2012 at 7:02 am Link to this comment

Gary,  many good points, but I cherry picked…..“A Nationwide Boycott, which would necessarily include the republican voters as well as the Democratic Obama lovers”  Unfortunately this sert up the classic prisoners dilema…....one side says it will boycott, but on election day, both ‘sides’ rush to vote as they realize they can’t trust the other side to keep their word. 

But Smith (if that is even his real name or image) is not advocating a nationwide boycott.  He’s making the most clever arguments he can** here on a ‘liberal’ website to discourage voting.  You cite a number of Republican tactics for keeping people from the polls, and it is easily conceivable either a ‘lone-wolf faithful’ or quasi or fully supported operatives would be out ‘trolling’.  Smith has no credibility to me as a left-leaning advocate of anything resembling egalitarianism.  Look at his last post.  Starts out innocent and disarming enough ‘...I don’t understand’.  Yea, right. 

** but not really that clever.  The arguments disrespect the reader by lacking logical validity, rather they are disjointed ‘logical looking bricks’.  The term ‘bricks’ was coined by Ed here, and it seems to describe a rebuttal which misconstrues and misdirects selective and out-of-context portions of the argument in a way as to appear to be valid.  They are thrown in quantity, as point by point is addressed not by reasoned reply, but by a brick, giving the overall look and sound of credibility on the part of the brick thrower.  After all, just replying with any old bullshit on a point-by-point basis gives the appearance of diligence.  But the reader is required to spend more time than they typically can in order to fully evaluate the real logical validity of the so-called counter points.  So, not everybody is a fan of Ed, but this term ‘brick thrower’ is a good contribution in my view.  Shenonymous, if you’ve read this, I’d like your view please?  On the term ‘brick thrower’ as a useful tool?

Mark, you seem to be failing to do any better to stick to a rationale for your original claim that ‘boycotting voting would do some good’. 

And while off the central point, can you prove your claim: “(the) premise that votes can be created out of thin air is false. While it is impossible to verify how people voted, it IS possible to verify how many people voted.”  I know for a fact that in the last election the first 49 ballots (serial numbers 1-49 from several voting precincts were missing at the opening of polls.  People complained on the radio from several precincts.  Those ballots were likely used to create votes out of thin air. 

And your latest post of April 13 at 4:43 am is not only off-topic, it’s pure right wing dogma.  Loaded words such as ‘grateful’ and ‘providing’ reinforce the vision that government is ‘them’, i.e. ‘the problem’.  You feed the ‘get rid of the government’ mentality.  Why not use a ‘get rid of corruption’ approach?  Oh, I forgot, you’re supposedly an anarchist…..how convenient.

Report this
Mark E. Smith's avatar

By Mark E. Smith, April 13, 2012 at 5:43 am Link to this comment

Another thing I don’t understand is why people are so grateful to the government for providing Social Security, minimally funding education, and providing some other services. The goveernment isn’t using its own money to provide these services. Nobody in office is reaching into their own pocket to give us a dime. They take our tax money, spend about half of it on wars, and of the other half they give a lot of it to banks and big corporations, pay themselves, and then give back a very small percentage of our money in services to us.

I guess the reason people are so grateful to government, is because the government could easily take our money and spend all of it on things that most of us don’t want, like wars and bailouts, and not give any of our money back to us at all. I can understand that. I too would prefer a thief who takes my money but lets me keep my wallet, ID, and carfare home, to a thief who takes it all. But if I’m asked to vote for one of the two thieves, I won’t vote because I don’t want to consent to having a thief, not even a less evil thief, in charge of my country and my grandchildren’s future.

Report this
Mark E. Smith's avatar

By Mark E. Smith, April 13, 2012 at 5:26 am Link to this comment

kulu writes, “I don’t think either party cares a damn about their credibility or their legitimacy. Power is what drives them, that and money which the corporations are quite willing to dole out.”

If they just wanted power, they wouldn’t bother to hold elections. If they just wanted money, they wouldn’t waste billions of dollars funding election campaigns. Despite being the world’s sole superpower, the US can’t go it alone. Even with allied support in Afghanistan, the US can’t win. Do you think that countries like Australia, Canada, England, Germany, and other countries that hold elections would continue to support the US if the US didn’t hold elections?

“If they cared about credibility they would stop deceiving their voters in a bare faced way knowing full well as they lie that most of their audience know it.”

Since 50% still vote, either 50% believes the lies or just doesn’t care. Many of them admire smooth liars and are proud of having an evil government. There are voters who are proud that US students lag behind foreign students in math and science. There are voters who agree with Madeleine Albright that spending trillions of dollars and killing more than half a million innocent kids is worth it if it keeps gas prices low at the pump. There are people who prefer that insurance companies rather than doctors can decide if a patient gets necessary medical treatment or not.

As the world’s sole military superpower and one of the world’s top arms dealers, the US supplies training and weapons to brutal dictatorships all over the world and could certainly hold power here without bothering to have elections. The problem is that the US doesn’t want just power, it wants to claim the legitimate power that only comes from the consent of the governed. Because the US cannot send the cops and military door to door forcing people to vote at gunpoint, it has no choice but to spend billions of dollars funding election campaigns, or to forfeit any pretense of being a democracy or a republic.

The US has always been a plutocracy and was never a democracy or a republic, but because it holds elections, millions of people are fooled into thinking that it is a democratic form of government. If people wanted a truly democratic form of government, and understood that we don’t have one, and that the only thing making it appear that we have one is their vote, maybe they’d stop voting.

Or maybe they wouldn’t. But the political parties and the corporations that fund them are spending billions of dollars on elections. So they must want something more than just power and money and I believe that what they want is the consent of the governed for them to remain in power and keep stealing our money.

Report this
kulu's avatar

By kulu, April 13, 2012 at 3:27 am Link to this comment

Mark,

You say,

“but if very few people vote they will not be able to claim the consent of even 50% of the governed, so it would diminish their credibility and their claim to legitimacy.”

I don’t think either party cares a damn about their credibility or their legitimacy. Power is what drives them, that and money which the corporations are quite willing to dole out.

If they cared about credibility they would stop deceiving their voters in a bare faced way knowing full well as they lie that most of their audience know it.

Report this
Mark E. Smith's avatar

By Mark E. Smith, April 12, 2012 at 9:23 pm Link to this comment

John best writes: “You missed that in voting for ‘candidate A’, you might get a patronage job, kickback, contract or handout.  There might be a calculation in here.  If few enough people vote, the remainders are responsible as the ‘party faithful’, so there are fewer to divide the goodies?

In any case, it does make sense to vote if you’re in a patronage position of some sort.

And at this time in history, it does make sense to discourage voting if you’re working for the Republicans patronage system.”

Unfortunately, the fact is that Republicans are just as likely to get patronage jobs in a Democratic administration as in a Republican administration.

If you’re a right-wing Republican corporate or banking executive and haven’t yet been appointed to a Cabinet-level or agency head position by Obama, your best bet is to vote him a second term.

The Obama agenda is more wars, bigger bailouts, more environmental destruction, fewer civil rights, and favoring corporations over people. That’s the Republican agenda, so most of the “Democrats” appointed by Obama are DINOs, Democrats who favor the Republican agenda as he does, and are therefore Democrats In Name Only.

It isn’t just Obama. Democratic nominee in 2000, Al Gore, had as his running mate DINO Joe Lieberman, a “Democrat” more right-wing than most Republicans.

So the reason you vote isn’t to pretend that you might be flipping the man the finger, but because you are hoping to get a patronage job?

If so, John, I’m sorry to burst your bubble, but I don’t think you’re right-wing and corporatist enough to get a patronage job in a Democratic or a Republican administration. The campaigns of both parties are funded by the big corporations and both parties are obedient to their big donors.

You are correct in stating that even if only a very few people vote, the Republicans and Democrats will continue in power and continue their corporate agenda, but if very few people vote they will not be able to claim the consent of even 50% of the governed, so it would diminish their credibility and their claim to legitimacy.

Report this
Shenonymous's avatar

By Shenonymous, April 12, 2012 at 8:59 pm Link to this comment

You are quite wrong.  Perhaps you missed it Mark E. Smith, my post
at April 12 2:09 pm “all with about 50% - 63% of the gas prices goes
for taxes.”  And maybe you ought to check out your invented fact?

moonravennie you are rather vile yourself.  If you really are a redman,
then you are a sorry racist example. Do you think I care a shit if you
vote?  I don’t.  You seem excessively flooded with self-righteous
indignation.  Since you are a minority, if the Republicans have their
way, you won’t have to worry about not voting anyway.  Your right to
vote would be revoked. 

Seems like a discussion on why it might be important to have the
right and then to exercise that right to vote could be .  What is the
best reason to vote?  Is it always for purely rational self-interest that
one votes, or are there moral reasons why one should?  If prudence is
the measure, then it is a pragmatic and utilitarian decision, which
mainly spells self-interest.  If sentimentality is the guiding light,
then one would definitely vote and would vote emotionally from
“feeling.” 

The main reason voting is important in my opinion has to do with
preserving the will of the majority to govern a society or country and
not replace it with the will of a minority.

Report this
Mark E. Smith's avatar

By Mark E. Smith, April 12, 2012 at 8:53 pm Link to this comment

Gary writes:

“Voting, not at all for no-one no how.
Result: a vote faked for corporate clown.

No possibility of proving non-vote because no paper trail. Sadly, this totally negates the benefits that Mark is claiming will automatically accrue from not voting.”

Yes, you did miss something, Gary. John’s premise that votes can be created out of thin air is false. While it is impossible to verify how people voted, it IS possible to verify how many people voted.

When there are more votes than registered voters, everyone knows that the vote count was fraudulent.

In order to create votes out of thin air, you have to add voters to the voting rolls. There is a paper record of which registered voters actually voted and which did not, as a name on the voting rolls has to be checked off when a vote is counted. Who they voted for is not verifiable, but the fact that they signed their absentee ballot envelope or signed the registration book at the polls can be verified.

When Lyndon B. Johnson’s Ballot Box 13 fraud was committed, people saw that voters had been added to the voter registration polls it the end, in alphabetical order, and all in the same pen and the same handwriting. But there was nothing anyone could do about it because it is elections officials who certify vote counts, not voters. And since elections officials are the only people in a position to commit that type of fraud, they aren’t likely to refuse to certify their own fraud.

Report this
Gary Mont's avatar

By Gary Mont, April 12, 2012 at 8:22 pm Link to this comment

You’re right. I missed that aspect John.

On the other hand, I was sorta looking for benefits accruing to the honest voter and hadn’t really considered those whose votes are simply a product/service to be sold to the highest bidder.

I am a little confused however.

By disenfranchising the democratic vote through re-zoning, wierd Voter ID Card presentation, simple misconstruing records to reclassify citizens as felons, brown-shirt thugs intimidating voters at the polling station, losing ballot boxes in select districts that are predominantly democratic and all of the other standard Republican Political Activities designed to cheat the public, the Republicans are in effect causing people to not vote.

If as Mark states, not voting automatically loses political credibility - and by association, the ability to borrow foreign money - how is it that the Republican program of disenfranchisement does not accomplish this same goal. I believe the current total voter turnout is roughly only 50% already.

I wonder if Mark means A Nationwide Boycott, which would necessarily include the republican voters as well as the Democratic Obama lovers, is needed to cause this loss of political credibility on the world stage.

If this is the case, such a movement is simply impractical as there is no way on earth anyone will ever convince a card carrying Republican that not voting will benefit him in any way - unless of course you paid him money to not vote and then watched him 24/7 to make sure he didn’t sneak into a voting booth anyway.

And as far as Obama lovers are concerned, they are apparently incapable of doing anything like research what Obama does and ONLY believe what Obama says.

After careful scrutiny of this situation, I’d say that without a verifiable paper-trail attached directly to each person’s vote, and the elimination of all Diebold and other remote controlled voting machines, voting in America is as effective as pissing on a wall as far as experessing the will of We The People.

Even Shenonymous’s joy of degrading non-voters as non-citizens is only practical if you can actually identify those who did not vote, which is as impossible as identifying those who did vote.

Of course, you could just constantly say things like “non-voters suck”, or “non-voters do not deserve human rights”, and hope that there are some non-voters in the crowd who can hear you, but that personal touch of verbally lambasting non-voters to their face is pretty much just a wet dream under this system. So, voting for prestige seems to be similarily useless, as a means of personal gratification.

In conclusion, since the corporate clown always wins, I’d say, generally, Americans are just plain fucked.

Your best bet: become born again Christians and pray that Jesus destroys the planet before the rest of the world finds out you’re really just multi-colored sheep waiting to be sheared and of course, pretending to vote on which of the shepherds get to do the shearing.

Oooops…. might be too late for that actually. I think that particular news has already reached Europe and beyond. Probably through Twitter.

But at least all you non-voters out there can honestly say that you are doing exactly as much as the voters are doing to get a good guy into office.

Report this
John Best asks,

By John Best asks, "What IS Progress"?, April 12, 2012 at 7:09 pm Link to this comment

You missed that in voting for ‘candidate A’, you might get a patronage job, kickback, contract or handout.  There might be a calculation in here.  If few enough people vote, the remainders are responsible as the ‘party faithful’, so there are fewer to divide the goodies? 

In any case, it does make sense to vote if you’re in a patronage position of some sort.

And at this time in history, it does make sense to discourage voting if you’re working for the Republicans patronage system.

Report this
moonraven's avatar

By moonraven, April 12, 2012 at 6:30 pm Link to this comment

Yeah, Gary:  You missed out on Bingo night to get rid of all that white stress from posting on truthdig to make enemies and influence people and having trolls give you the finger.

Voting is for suckers.

This ole wooden Indian never been one of them guys….

Report this
Gary Mont's avatar

By Gary Mont, April 12, 2012 at 6:24 pm Link to this comment

Revised:

Voting for Cnadidate A - “The Apparent Good Guy”.
Result: a vote flipped for the corporate clown.

No possibility of vote verification because no paper trail. This totally negates any possibility of the vote electing an apparently good candidate.

================================

Voting for Mickey Mouse, or “None of the Above”.
Result: a vote flipped for the corporate clown.

No possibility of NOTA vote verification because no paper trail. This totally negates any possibility of “giving the finger” to the corporate controllers.

================================

Voting, not at all for no-one no how.
Result: a vote faked for corporate clown.

No possibility of proving non-vote because no paper trail. Sadly, this totally negates the benefits that Mark is claiming will automatically accrue from not voting.

================================

Looks like Shenonymous has hit the nail on the head here. The onliest possible reason for voting is so you can pee on those who publically admit that they don’t.

Mind you, since there is no way to verify who did and who did not vote, non-voters are perfectly free to claim they voted and avoid being peed on by proud voters.

Am I missing something??

Report this
moonraven's avatar

By moonraven, April 12, 2012 at 6:16 pm Link to this comment

Gary:  I believe that the figure you cited IS, in fact, less than 10%.

I am sorry that I didn’t go back and re-read your post, but the thread is long and filled with drivel and after all I DO pay by the fraction of an hour to use a computer in this Mexican internet cafe.

I am not paid to post by the gringo government agencies.

So, that ain’t stress, kid.  That’s just financial prudence—something gringos apparently are unacquainted with. Too much “ganja”, I guess.  And anyway El Chapo Guzman, the biggest mariguana dealer on the planet—just coincidentally Mexican and listed on the Forbes billionaires list as Mexican businessman, keeps the gringo banks afloat between bailouts by your tax dollars.

I am never stressed.  I frequently CAUSE stress to folks whose consciences are not quite clean, but I never have it.

It’s a white syndrome, after all.

Haven’t you ever noticed how laid back all those Cigar Store Indians are?

Took a lot of years of practice to look like wood, but once it entered the DNA—BINGO!

Oh, that’s right—Bingo came a little bit later….

Report this
John Best asks,

By John Best asks, "What IS Progress"?, April 12, 2012 at 6:11 pm Link to this comment

Let it out moonraven.  Let it all out. 

Gary remember TAO Walker?  I wonder what happened to him.  Though he spoke cryptically, he made you think.  Very artful.

Report this
Gary Mont's avatar

By Gary Mont, April 12, 2012 at 5:54 pm Link to this comment

moonraven wrote: “...and who said of the assholes that he has met and observed not even 10% were non-whites!”

If you are going to demand that posters “Learn to read”, it would behoove you to follow your own advice first.

I wrote:...the total would not constitute a tenth of one percent…

Or as a wannabe mathemetician might say it: “0.1%

There are clinincal drugs that alleviate that rabid-anger syndrome you know. Or you could just smoke some ganja once in a while. Who knows, you might even write a post that makes a point if you were simply not so stressed out all the time.

Report this
moonraven's avatar

By moonraven, April 12, 2012 at 5:31 pm Link to this comment

John:

I’ll put this very succinctly, you excremental troll:

Put a sock in it!

Nobody’s buying horse manure today.

At least not your manipulated monsanto brand.

Report this
John Best asks,

By John Best asks, "What IS Progress"?, April 12, 2012 at 5:25 pm Link to this comment

Man, you go to great effort to spin a convoluted piece of crap for an argument.  I’ll address the first point only, as you’re not adequately on point enough to warrant more.  In bold below is what is ‘on point’. 

But to your first ‘point’.  In your first paragraph immediately below you seem to make the case that corporations want you to vote because they spend money on advertizing.  Do you immediately conclude with ‘therefore, do not vote’, or are you missing some logic there?  After all, you advocate not voting, so the conclusion of any of your argument should be ‘therefore, do not vote’, correct?  Well, take us from point A to your conclusion.  Your point I think is, ‘corporations spend money on advertising political candidates’.  I accept this as a premise.  Now, please connect the premise to your conclusion. 

And if you wish to make another argument,
I re-re-re-ask, “Can one of you supposedly non-trolls just state succinctly, the best case for boycotting elections?  What are the anticipated direct results and why do they follow?”

Smiths reply: the best reason I know for boycotting elections is to stop authorizing politicians who can’t be held accountable from running the country, to de-legitimize the corporate oligarchy, and to establish government of the people, by the people, and for the people in its place.”

Please, by all means address the question, succinctly.  There is no need for a lengthy multi-point reply, only your single very best reason is required.

Report this
moonraven's avatar

By moonraven, April 12, 2012 at 5:22 pm Link to this comment

Heteronym the Hatespeech Queen:

An extermination campaign doesn’t have to be successful to be an extermination campaign that is part of public and private policy in Gringolandia.

If it had bdeen 100% successful it would not be ongoing.

And I wouldn’t be posting here.

Duh.

Nevertheless, you gringos have managed to off (your term, I believe) 20,000,000 of us.  I don’t know the stats for all the blacks you exterminated and all the asians and all the misnamed “hispanics”.

Not bad for an extermination campaign—beats the crap out of Pol Pot, Mao, Stalin and Hitler—supposedly—because YOU say so—the Big Bad Genocide Guys.

Report this
moonraven's avatar

By moonraven, April 12, 2012 at 5:15 pm Link to this comment

Shenny:

A Native American elitist!

Shit, man, it took a white pimp for patriotism to peg me.

Thanks a lot—I never would have come to that conclusion myself.

I don’t vote.

Natives were forced to become US citizens in 1924.

When we are given full rights as persons, maybe then I’ll go vote for Mickey Mouse, too.

I understand under the electoral provisions in Gringolandia, Mickey can be president again—even though he already served two terms:  2000-2008.

Laughing my red ass off all the way to the voting booth, I am.

Hee hee hee.  Stupid white troll made my day.

Report this
moonraven's avatar

By moonraven, April 12, 2012 at 5:10 pm Link to this comment

John Best:

Every time you post to me you become more hateful. 

And more obtuse.

Sorry to pop your bubble-gum, pipsqueak, but my comment about the majority of assholes having been white was in AGREEMENT, with some reservations, to the comment posted by

Gary Mont

who you have been sucking up to because he is a white male

and who said of the assholes that he has met and observed not even 10% were non-whites!

Learn to read, you simpering white sycophant.

Report this
Gary Mont's avatar

By Gary Mont, April 12, 2012 at 4:53 pm Link to this comment

Lets see if I got this right…

By voting for Mickey Mouse, or for the (apparently) non-corporate controllers’ candidate, you are actually voting for the corporate controllers’ candidate because the vote can - and thus will - be switched to prove popular support for the pre-chosen corporate winner.

By not voting for anyone at all, you are actually voting for the corporate controllers’ candidate because the vote can - and thus will - be created by the computers out of thin air, or by the vote-counters as needed, as if you did vote for the corporate winner, to prove popular support for the pre-chosen corporate winner.

Did I get this right so far??

Everyone appears to be strangely in agreement that the vote itself is pretty much a farce and does not at all show the “will of the people”, but rather the “will of the vote counters”, or their controllers.

If this scenario is correct, then it really matters not one whit, whether you vote or not, as far as who gets elected is concerned, since voting and not voting produce the identical results - the election of the pre-chosen corporate candidate.

So, I have to assume that anyone who demands that everyone vote, absolutely DOES believes that the Vote Process Works and that their vote will be counted and that voting is effective.

When they say they think the vote is fixed and goes uncounted, or is counted erroneously, they’re actually telling a mis-truth or possibly a partial truth.

I can only imagine why. Perhaps they are embarrased to admit that they still emotionally believe in a system that deep down, their logical mind knows is fraudulent.

Or maybe they believe that the vote is fixed but that its not completely fixed and that some honest vote counting still takes place - would that be a good guess??

Otherwise, what would be the point?

Or is it simply as Shenonymous states it?

That by voting, an American Citizen can better believe that they have Won the Right to Citizenship and thus accept whatever benefits the system doles out without a guilty conscience and publically lord it over any who admit they did not vote, by dis-counting the non-voters’ right to citizenship??

To me that seems to be a pretty pointless aim, but I suppose others might consider it important enough to pretend to participate in a system that they know excludes them.

According to the above comparison between voting and not voting, this appears to be the only possible rationale for casting a vote however; a sense of feel good about taking whatever the system still offers up and the “right” to look down on all non-voters and claim they have no right to call themselves citizens because they did not cast a vote.

Comments??

Report this
Mark E. Smith's avatar

By Mark E. Smith, April 12, 2012 at 3:16 pm Link to this comment

Uh, the price at the pump is only part of the cost of gas. The trillions of dollars of tax money spent on wars for oil need to be factored in, and when you do that the US has the highest price of gas in the world.

Report this
Shenonymous's avatar

By Shenonymous, April 12, 2012 at 3:09 pm Link to this comment

John Best asks, “What IS Progress”?, April 12 1:22 pm – It might
not be a bitter false judgment for leftists to not vote if they could
convince the Republicans to boycott the polls as well. Fair is fair. 
But capitulating one’s right to vote is tantamount to not being a
citizen.  Those advocating not voting should pick up and leave. 
Why should these people have the same advantages that we
voters do?  Everything from affordable health care provided by
the Affordable Health Care Act, good roads, free education r
egardless of how stellar it is… or isn’t, best gas prices in the
world.

http://www.mytravelcost.com/petrol-prices/ 
In dollars per gallon for Spain $7.60, Italy’s $8.79, France $9.24,
Germany $9.07, Portugal $9.13, Czech Republic, $8.21, Sweden
and Greece are both over $9.00, Denmark $9.69,  the Netherlands
$9.58 all with about 50% - 63% of the gas prices goes for taxes. 
Gas average in the US is about $3.90 including taxes.
http://blog.gasbuddy.com/posts/Global-gas-prices-might-make-you-grateful/1715-490364-914.aspx

Report this
Mark E. Smith's avatar

By Mark E. Smith, April 12, 2012 at 3:01 pm Link to this comment

John, no matter what anyone says, you will continue to believe that the corporations spend billions of dollars funding the election campaigns of both major parties because it isn’t important to them whether people vote of not and they don’t really care if people vote or not.

Do you know of anything else that corporations spend billions of dollars on that isn’t important to them and that they don’t really care about?

Do you believe that the big defense contractors, the big banks, the multinational oil companies, the pharmaceutical industry, and the other big corporate campaign donors who donate in almost equal amounts to both major parties, are the sort of decent, responsible, concerned entities that would do things out of altruism, without seeking a benefit for themself in return? Can you name a single time they’ve done so?

Since you gave flipping the man the bird as a reason for voting, you must consider flipping the man the bird to be a valid reason for doing something. But voting for the man, or casting a ballot that can be counted as a vote for the man, isn’t flipping the man the bird.

Can you give a better reason for voting than to be able to secretly know (but be unable to prove) that your vote, which was counted as a vote for Obama or Romney, was cast by you as a vote for Mickey Mouse?

Do you really think that the computer programs that flip the votes care whether those votes are for third party candidates or for Mickey Mouse?

You can sit at your computer and believe that your vote is a way of flipping the man the bird, but unless you believe that the votes will be counted honestly, which you do not, you know that your vote can be counted as a vote for the man. Why do you believe that a vote that can be counted as a vote for the man, is flipping the man the bird?

Is that your only reason for voting?

If you can’t come up with anything better than secretly knowing that you intended to cast a protest vote, even though it was very likely counted as a vote for the man, you really don’t have much of a case to demand that people give you a reason for not voting. You have no rational reason for voting.

Report this
John Best asks,

By John Best asks, "What IS Progress"?, April 12, 2012 at 2:22 pm Link to this comment

Just examine this snippet…..
“Boycotting elections does not solve these problems.
If 0.001% of the electorate turned out, the politicians would proceed as if 99.999% had turned out.  The corporate oligarchy cares not a bit if the electorate didn’t not turn out.”

Not true. The corporate oligarchy doesn’t spend billions of dollars funding election campaigns, because they don’t want people to vote. The fact that they donate in almost equal amounts to both major parties proves that they don’t care which one of their puppets wins, they just want people to vote so that their puppet government can claim the consent of the governed.

The reply does not address my argument.  It’s just a reply for the sake of it.  The entire reply in total has the appearance of a reasoned point-by-point reply, but upon analysis, the tactic is usually to grasp some incidental phrase, and take issue with it without addressing the central point. 

Now Mark, I know how dedicated you are, but stop selling your crap. 

So, concisely, I re-re-ask, “Can one of you supposedly non-trolls just state succinctly, the best case for boycotting elections?  What are the anticipated direct results and why do they follow?”

Smiths reply: the best reason I know for boycotting elections is to stop authorizing politicians who can’t be held accountable from running the country, to de-legitimize the corporate oligarchy, and to establish government of the people, by the people, and for the people in its place.”

Please, by all means address the question, succinctly.  There is no need for a lengthy multi-point reply, only your single very best reason is required.

Report this
Mark E. Smith's avatar

By Mark E. Smith, April 12, 2012 at 2:17 pm Link to this comment

Leefeller, I’m not selling anything. The corporations that spend billions of dollars funding election campaigns are selling something. They’re marketing their puppet candidates so that they can continue to get government bailouts, not have to pay taxes, not have to be regulated, and not be prosecuted for their crimes.

What I’m doing is the opposite of selling something. I’m saying that just because the corporations spend billions of dollars marketing their puppet candidates, doesn’t mean that we have to buy it. Huge amounts of money are spent marketing Coke and Pepsi, but I know they’re not healthy so I don’t drink either one. Would you claim that a person who urges people not to drink unhealthy soft drinks is helping Coke outsell Pepsi, or helping Pepsi outsell Coke?

It is the Democrats who are helping the Republicans, by continuing and expanding the Republican agenda, refusing to prosecute Republicans for their crimes, and appointing more Republicans to their administrations than the Republicans do.

Report this
John Best asks,

By John Best asks, "What IS Progress"?, April 12, 2012 at 2:07 pm Link to this comment

Lee, thanks for that.  I thought it was just me seeing a type of poster, who, overtly and upon superficial glance, seems centrist or left-of-center.  But what you point out, “the agenda .......is no or little different then what the Republicans are doing…..”

Smith isn’t the only poster who’s exhibited this…....they are tenacious, almost driven to stick to that objective.  In Smith’s case…..thwarting voting.  I’ve seen others ‘selling’ various right-ish ideologies. 

Now as for their ‘officialness’?  Getting paid?  Who the hell knows, but it does make old Ozark Michael look pretty dumb for selling that crap for nothing!  wink  Let me speculate in half fun.  I remember a poster some time back, MarthA, remember?  Totally selling some classic ‘leftish’ notion, but in the most obnoxious way.  He/She used the term ‘boiler room operation’, and it stuck.  Partly because they accused me or someone of being a ‘boiler room operative’.  Well, that’s another thing that raises my antennae…...an accusation out of left field, which seems to me like playing a preemptive offense as a defense.  But that’s a side point.  What I was trying to get at is I can imagine a nice evangelical social hour in the community room, and one of these righties, (who can’t get a date) sitting at the computer showing off how they’re making trouble for those evil lefties.  There’s just some bravado in some of their writing that seems like they’re writing for someone looking over their shoulder. 

Am I imagining all this…heck yes.  But that doesn’t mean it’s not true.  You hang out here long enough, you see patterns, or ghosts, or imaginary adversaries, or something…...

Now what I wonder, is Mark Smith any of that?  Who knows, who cares.  If he has a good point, I don’t care if he is an operative or not, I’ll argue the point as best I can.  And I’ll refrain from name calling and other rhetorical trickery.  This is the first sign of a phony, resorting to logical fallacy.

Report this
Mark E. Smith's avatar

By Mark E. Smith, April 12, 2012 at 2:04 pm Link to this comment

John wrote: “Because votes can be made up out of thin air.  Every eligible vote not cast can be directed to any candidate after the ballots close.”

It is possible to stuff the ballot boxes by adding the names of registered voters who didn’t vote. That’s why I fought to three years with the Registrar of Voters to get my name off the voting rolls. But when a precinct with fewer than 400 registered voters got more than 3,000 votes for Bush, it was easy for everyone to see that it was fraudulent. 

“We do vote on paper here, and I get a serialized receipt, so my ‘Mickey mouse’ is on paper.”

But your paper vote is counted by a computer and that vote count cannot be verified. So even if your paper vote appears to have been cast the way you wanted it, the computer count can be different. 

“Boycotting elections does not solve these problems.
If 0.001% of the electorate turned out, the politicians would proceed as if 99.999% had turned out.  The corporate oligarchy cares not a bit if the electorate didn’t not turn out.”

Not true. The corporate oligarchy doesn’t spend billions of dollars funding election campaigns, because they don’t want people to vote. The fact that they donate in almost equal amounts to both major parties proves that they don’t care which one of their puppets wins, they just want people to vote so that their puppet government can claim the consent of the governed.

“They care only if we stop giving them our money, stopped working as slaves, or stopped them from exploiting (stealing) natural resources.  And how does not doing something (turning out for elections) end up ‘establishing government’?  Seems like you left out a whole lot.”

They don’t care if you don’t give them your money. As long as they can get people to vote, they can claim to be a stable government with the consent of the governed and maintain a good enough international credit rating to borrow money. If only 0.001% of voters turned out, they could no longer claim to have the consent of the governed, would no longer be considered a stable government, and would no longer be able to borrow foreign money.

What you said was that voting anti-incumbent or Mickey Mouse was flipping the man the bird. Since your vote can be counted as a vote for the man, you can’t flip the man the bird by voting for him. But if you don’t vote you can damage his credibility and his credit rating. Nobody can know for sure how people voted, but the turnout is more difficult to fake—when there’s a low turnout in a presidential race it makes the news all over the world.

You can’t stop the government from borrowing foreign money or stealing environmental resources by voting in the elections that give them the legitimate power to do so.

More than 92% of votes in the US are counted in ways that are unverifiable. Even if you happen to live in one of the few places where votes are counted honestly, they are not enough to swing an election. The overwhelming majority of US votes can be flipped or stolen, so the election results are not reliable.

Trusting the future of your country to an unreliable vote count is irresponsible and apathetic.

Report this
Leefeller's avatar

By Leefeller, April 12, 2012 at 1:36 pm Link to this comment

It appears to me, the agenda in order to get people not to vote is no or little different then what the Republicans are doing in many Red States,  making people go through annoying hoops in order to register to vote. One could suppose Mark, you could be an ally of the Republicans and potentially a think tank operative, it would seem the kettle is calling the pot black?

Even though I feel sincerity in what you say, I disagree with it, which should not require name calling or Chair Actor Ass assinations, after all you are the one selling something here?

Report this
Shenonymous's avatar

By Shenonymous, April 12, 2012 at 1:17 pm Link to this comment

moonraven, April 10 1:09 pm - Gee as long as you can make a mark,
like a big X, or some other blotch heck you can vote even if you make
a smudge with your big toe.  That is precisely why the Republicans
want to keep the public as illiterate as possible.  So they don’t know
what the f they are voting for.  Anyway, your post makes you seem to
be an elitist.  And likewise, who you vote for is not of the least interest
to me.  Just don’t try to force your beliefs onto moi. I will give my reasons why I choose the way I do and I don’t give a damn if anyone is influenced
or not. I expect on this website, not many would agree with a rational
centrist fundamentalist liberal.  But you never never know….LOL Not
everyone shows hostility towards me.

Report this

By heterochromatic, April 12, 2012 at 11:29 am Link to this comment

some people believe that the government is malevolent and that their votes
aren’t honestly counted and the results of elections always rigged. they think
that there’s no real chance that this governmental system will honestly serve
them.


they really do have no reason to vote…....


I question what reason they have to pay taxes and remain in the country…..why
adopt this sort of extreme position, wear the absurd headgear, and hang
around posting?

if the system is impervious to voters wishes, then a shortage of voters isn’t
gonna mean shit. If your MickeyMouse votes are fraudulently counted then your
vote can be faked as easily while you stay at home, above it all.

As long as you stay here and send in that tax money, you’re as much a
participant as anyone else…..even if you do it with the fez on.

Report this
John Best asks,

By John Best asks, "What IS Progress"?, April 12, 2012 at 11:23 am Link to this comment

That’s a back-handed way to challenge my legitimacy, the think-tank bit.  And, no, I really didn;t read it.  I did read over it just now though, and my point, “Because votes can be made up out of thin air.  Every eligible vote not cast can be directed to any candidate after the ballots close.” I think counters your argument.  A vote for mickey mouse can go to a D or R just as easily as one not cast. 

And your justification, the best one you have is this?  “.....the reason for boycotting elections is to stop authorizing politicians who can’t be held accountable from running the country, to delegitimize the corporate oligarchy, and to establish government of the people, by the people, and for the people in its place.”

If 0.001% of the electorate turned out, the politicians would proceed as if 99.999% had turned out.  The corporate oligarchy cares not a bit if the electorate didn’t not turn out.  They care only if we stop giving them our money, stopped working as slaves, or stopped them from exploiting (stealing) natural resources.  And how does not doing something (turning out for elections) end up ‘establishing government’?  Seems like you left out a whole lot. 

But nevermind, just go on calling me a think-tank operative.  Character assassination.  Yup, that really addresses the issue.

Report this
Mark E. Smith's avatar

By Mark E. Smith, April 12, 2012 at 9:42 am Link to this comment

John, the best reason I know for boycotting elections is to stop authorizing politicians who can’t be held accountable from running the country, to delegitimize the corporate oligarchy, and to establish government of the people, by the people, and for the people in its place.

I don’t believe that you didn’t read my last comment, John. I think you did read it, as did all the other political party get-out-the-vote enthusiasts, and an emergency call was sent out to all the corporate-funded political think tanks and to the military squadrons tasked with dominating cyberspace, asking how to respond. When they couldn’t come up with anything, they advised you to just pretend you hadn’t read it. I could be wrong, but that’s what I really think happened. It certainly wouldn’t be the first time that reactionaries, confronted with irrefutable truth, have just stuck their fingers in their ears and shouted, “La, la, la…I can’t hear you!”

Report this
John Best asks,

By John Best asks, "What IS Progress"?, April 12, 2012 at 4:34 am Link to this comment

MArk, I stopped reading right here:
“That means that you are perfectly aware that your vote for some other candidate or for Mickey Mouse, could be counted as a vote for a candidate the corporate oligarchy wants, like say, for example, Barack Obama or Mitt Romney.”

Because votes can be made up out of thin air.  Every eligible vote not cast can be directed to any candidate after the ballots close. 

We do vote on paper here, and I get a serialized receipt, so my ‘Mickey mouse’ is on paper.  Paperless machines are bullshit, agreed, and even the paper ballots have traceability problems.  Boycotting elections does not solve these problems.

So, concisely, I re-ask, “Can one of you supposedly non-trolls just state succinctly, the best case for boycotting elections?  What are the anticipated direct results and why do they follow?”

And if you start your post off with name calling or an logically invalid twisting of a scenario, I scroll on.

Report this
Gary Mont's avatar

By Gary Mont, April 11, 2012 at 10:45 pm Link to this comment

Mark E. Smith:...you cannot be certain that your vote won’t be flipped and counted as a vote for Obama or for Romney.

Beautifully iterated, and re-iterated. smile

I really like the idea posted here earlier - Venezuala I think it was - where every voter gets a receipt for his/her vote, that can be used later to verify the tally. (I’d personally like to see vote fixing perceived as a crime equivalent to treason, but I’d settle for a receipt.)

Completely bypasses the fear of voter intimidation I always get when I mention that any secret ballot will be corrupted at the earliest possible opportunity, because there is no paper trail to disprove any false claim made by the counters.

Make voting as impossible to fudge as humanly possible and I’ll start voting again too.

Report this
Mark E. Smith's avatar

By Mark E. Smith, April 11, 2012 at 9:57 pm Link to this comment

John Best wrote in answering Gary’s question, “You ask, ‘Do you not still believe your vote WILL be counted honestly?’  No, but I can still flip the finger to the man by ‘participating’ and voting Mickey Mouse.  Or, I can go with the anti-incumbent strategy.  But abandoning elections, as Mr. Smith suggests?  No.  boycotting elections plays so perfectly into the hands of the corpo-ologarchy.”

Okay, John, let’s take this very slowly, okay?

You don’t believe that your vote will be counted honestly.

That means that you are perfectly aware that your vote for some other candidate or for Mickey Mouse, could be counted as a vote for a candidate the corporate oligarchy wants, like say, for example, Barack Obama or Mitt Romney.

In other words, you know that while you might wish to vote for a third party candidate or for Micky Mouse, you cannot be certain that your vote won’t be flipped and counted as a vote for Obama or for Romney.

A vote that is counted as a vote for Obama, is a vote for Obama, whether it was intended as such or not.

A vote that is counted as a vote for Romney, is a vote for Romney, whether it was intended as such or not.

So how do you conclude that voting for the man, or casting a ballot that you know can be counted as a vote for the man, is flipping the finger to the man?

You can’t flip the man the finger by voting for him.

Unless your vote is counted honestly, you can end up voting for Romney without your knowledge and against your will. You’d know you hadn’t voted for him, but nobody else would.

This isn’t a game, John. The corporate oligarchy is holding an election to ask you and all other voters if they have your permission to continue destroying the country. When you vote, you are granting them that permission, and even if you have your fingers crossed behind your back when you do it, and don’t really mean it, you are condoning the continuing destruction of the country. When you vote in an election where you cannot be certain that your vote will be counted honestly, you are granting the people holding the election the power to count your vote however they wish, and that will be however happens to be in their best interests, not in yours.

Only if your vote for Mickey Mouse was actually counted honestly as a vote for Mickey Mouse, could it be considered flipping Romney the bird. If it is counted as a vote for Romney, it is flipping yourself and everyone else the bird.

The only way to flip the man the bird is to refuse to vote in the man’s elections and to refuse to vote in any election where you cannot be sure that your vote will be counted honestly.

I know you’ll ignore me, find some way to misunderstand me, change the subject, or attack me, but this is such an important point that I’m going to restate it. Since you don’t believe that your vote will be counted honestly, you are perfectly aware that your vote for Mickey Mouse could be counted as a vote for Romney, and therefore you know that you are not flipping Romney the bird, as you are fully aware that your vote for Mickey Mouse can be counted as a vote for Romney.

After he’s elected, if Romney’s office sends you a letter on White House stationery thanking you for your vote, you’ll know in your heart that you had really tried to flip him the bird by voting for Mickey Mouse, but you won’t be able to prove it. When you cast a ballot in an election where you know the votes won’t be counted honestly, you’ve voting for whoever the corporate oligarchy wants to count your vote towards, not for who you want to vote for.

Any vote in an election where the votes don’t have to be counted honestly, is a vote for corruption. If voters weren’t apathetic, they’d refuse to vote until they could be sure that their votes were counted honestly. The problem with voters is that they;re too apathetic to care.

Report this

By heterochromatic, April 11, 2012 at 9:10 pm Link to this comment

Korky—- you don’t know the difference between extermination and oppression?

Report this

By Korky Day, April 11, 2012 at 9:00 pm Link to this comment

The extermination certainly continues, as “moonraven” says, as it does against Blacks, Browns, gays, women, and the poor.  It can’t stop on a dime.

The system oppresses everyone it can.

Report this

By heterochromatic, April 11, 2012 at 6:17 pm Link to this comment

and YOU can shitcan trying to tell anyone to avoid hate speech, racist fool.

Report this

By heterochromatic, April 11, 2012 at 6:15 pm Link to this comment

moonie——you’re bullshitting. your claim was US white exterminating non-
whites on an ongoing basis.

it ain’t happening and even the reservations are not what they were when we were
there.

St regis was dirt fucking poor back then and the local whites fucking hated them.

They ain’t poor any more . Read ‘em and don’t weep…be happy.

http://tinyurl.com/8yh2hnu

Report this

By Korky Day, April 11, 2012 at 5:08 pm Link to this comment

To defend “moonraven”, she never said the the First Nations were the only ones being exterminated.

Report this
John Best asks,

By John Best asks, "What IS Progress"?, April 11, 2012 at 4:56 pm Link to this comment

moonraven, what about white-on-white extermination?  What do you think West Virginia mining country is?  How about the fat belt, otherwise known as the bible belt?  I suppose carcinogenic factory ‘food’ and fatty salty sugery fast food is non-discriminatory.  How about out in ‘gasland’, where poor white trash are being disproportionally poisoned through their drinking water as a result of fracking? 

So, your statistical sampling of people you’ve worked with yields that whites are more likely to be assholes.  Well that may be, but watch out it’s catchy. 

And this is exactly the kind of crap that bugs me…..spreading hate and divisiveness.  Those who know me know I’ve been influenced by Ernst Becker and would normally launch into an us-vs-them ‘tribalism’ mini-lecture, and unfortunately, ‘tribalism’ might be an offensive double entendre in this context.  That said, your 67 year old racism perfectly feeds the requirements of divisions which serve the interests of the white assholes you’ve sampled.  (should I erase that?  It really sounds strange.  .....naaah)

Back to a relevant point of which you are a perfect example: we have been manipulated into thinking our particular special interest group (our modern ‘tribe’) should get special attention from the ‘commonwealth’, consequently, we dole out money, resources, polluting rights, etc, and the political class takes a significant share for the doling.  Meanwhile, the ‘common man’, the common good, the common wealth suffers.  So, in a very real way, you’ve fallen into the same trap as everybody, to set yourself apart from the ‘commonality of humanity’.  You think you’re special because your people have been abused.  Everybody falls into this thinking they’re special, not necessarily because of the commonality of being abused, but of nationality, ethnicity, profession, class, whatever.

There, was that rant racially charged enough so you can level charges back at me and we can call it even?  Good.  Peace.

Report this
moonraven's avatar

By moonraven, April 11, 2012 at 4:16 pm Link to this comment

Animal House?

I should have known that the teenagers were playing on this site again.

You clowns are not even trolls—just kids whose moms blocked you out of the XXX sites.

Report this
Leefeller's avatar

By Leefeller, April 11, 2012 at 3:51 pm Link to this comment

As John Belushi yelled in ‘Animal House’! .... “FOOD FIGHT!”

Report this
moonraven's avatar

By moonraven, April 11, 2012 at 3:45 pm Link to this comment

Gary,

Arrogance makes you do and say stupid things, too.

Report this
Gary Mont's avatar

By Gary Mont, April 11, 2012 at 3:44 pm Link to this comment

To: Korky Day

You asked why nobody was responding to your invitations.

“Do you prefer to fail or do I not express myself clearly?”

I responded with an observation that might explain the lack of respondents.

Sorry Korky, but all your posts appear to be simple sales pitches designed to get folks to visit your website. Methinks other folks might be seeing it that way too.”

What is your problem?? Since I admitted I have not visited the link you providced, there is no way I could know the site was not yours.

Sure as hell is a lot of free floating anger running about on TD today.

A warning.
Anger makes you do and say stupid things.
Really.

Report this
moonraven's avatar

By moonraven, April 11, 2012 at 3:42 pm Link to this comment

And you can shitcan that zionist hatespeech, too.

Report this
moonraven's avatar

By moonraven, April 11, 2012 at 3:40 pm Link to this comment

The system of bantustans called Indian reservations is just one example of the ongoing extermination campaign on non-whites in the US.

Duh.

And your wife supposedly volunteered on a reservation and you visited her there?!

And you post this disingenous drivel?!

You either have Alzheimer’s or you are simply evil.

Report this

By heterochromatic, April 11, 2012 at 3:36 pm Link to this comment

mppnie—- you might have aspired to learning some
math, but you seem not to have gotten very far.


you wanna try running some numbers by us to support
your bullshit about “the extermination campaign,
which is still ongoing, by whites against non-whites
in the US” ?


you’re a fantasist, akin to the saps who talk about
how the Gazans are starving.

http://www.thepeoplesvoice.org/TPV3/Voices.php/2008/1
2/12/eu-rewards-israel-for-starving-gazans-ex

Report this
moonraven's avatar

By moonraven, April 11, 2012 at 3:25 pm Link to this comment

Well, in all fairness, as a once-aspiring mathematician, I’d have to say that considering the extermination campaign, which is still ongoing, by whites against non-whites in the US, it could mean that during most of your lifetime whites were such an overwhelming majority there that it would have been nearly statistically impossible for you to have met as many non-white assholes as white assholes.

But, with whites now rapidly on their way to becoming a minority there….

However, just to fill out that picture a bit, I am 67 myself, and have spent the past twenty years outside of the US—primarily in Latin America and the Middle east, but also in Europe and Asia as well.  And although the majority of my time has been spent in regions dominantly non-white, I’d have to say that the white assholes I have met in those places also significantly outnumbered the non-white assholes.

So you’ll get no argument from me except about your obvious INCONGRUENCIES of using the labels and rhetoric of white power and white nostalgia for a USA of the founding fathers which never existed while claiming that all evil on the planet has been committed by stupid white people.

Life is complex, granted, but when I see those kinds of incogruencies on poltical commentary sites I pretty much automatically assume that the poster speaks with a forked tongue.

You want to grab the high ground—fine.  Let’s see if you can hold that position.

However, what I posted on another thread a few minutes ago still holds:  If arrogannce were gold, the gringos would have no national debt problem.

Report this
John Best asks,

By John Best asks, "What IS Progress"?, April 11, 2012 at 3:13 pm Link to this comment

“The Great (fill in racial slur here) Dream is a psychotic delusion.  Ergo, (fill in racial slur here) are living a collective psychosis.  In addition, they are too fat, foolish, lazy, multiply-addicted and cowardly to get off their butts.”

—yeah, thanks for that moonraven.  Gotta love universal truths.

Report this
moonraven's avatar

By moonraven, April 11, 2012 at 3:08 pm Link to this comment

Since it’s clear that Gary is phony as a 3 buck bill, I’m sure he’ll come up with some other reason to look down his nose at you.

If arrogance were gold, gringos would have no national debt problem.

Report this
Gary Mont's avatar

By Gary Mont, April 11, 2012 at 3:07 pm Link to this comment

moonraven: “I don’t find phonies charming or funny.”

I’m beginning to wonder when the last time you found anything funny might have been. So much anger.

A phony? I must admit I am a tad curious as to what you think I have professed to be - that you believe I am not.

But, for the record.

I have met many hundreds of people during the 60 some odd years of my life on earth, and witnessed the actions of thousands more. If I added up all the non-white assholes I’ve met or witnessed, the total would not constitute a tenth of one percent of the number of white assholes I’ve encountered.

In my opinion, damn near all the horrors, all the evils, all the suffering of this world, can be placed squarely at the feet of stupid white men.

If I’m a racist, its against my own race.

In your perpetual state of anger, you will likely perceive this statement to be an example of white pride. C’est la vie.

PS - I don’t do favours. I’m not here to make friends, but to influence people.

If you have issues with my words or the way I word my statements, please feel free to skip over them to other posts, as I have no intention of rewording them to suit any particular poster’s demands, whether they say the magic word or not. smile

Report this

By Korky Day, April 11, 2012 at 3:05 pm Link to this comment

Gary Mont mistakenly says I am just plugging my Web site.
I do not own or have any connection to
http://www.pledgebank.com
or
http://www.demochoice.org
or
http://www.truthdig.com ,
other than contributing text comments, etc., such as this one.

My own Web site is
http://www.korky.ca ,
which I rarely mention in these discussions.

I wonder what other excuses Gary will invent.

Report this
moonraven's avatar

By moonraven, April 11, 2012 at 2:48 pm Link to this comment

No, Korky, at least with this reader what you posted was fairly clear.

That’s not the point.

The point is that in Gringolandia you will not get a critical mass of support on any of these points—even though general strikes have been in active use in Europe for over a year now—and in Europe life is still of much higher quality than it is in the US.

Folks in the US all think they are going to be the one to come out on top, to land on the Forbes list of billionaires from the unemployment rolls. 

The Great Gringo Dream is a psychotic delusion.

Ergo, gringos are living a collective psychosis.

In addition, they are too fat, foolish, lazy, multiply-addicted and cowardly to get off their butts.

Even on this site there appear US government piecework posters trying to scare us into not even writing about any of Gringolandisa’s problems.

Ready to pull the rug out from under reasoned discussion if anyone gets the idea to use this site to organize something—a general strike, for example.

Report this
Gary Mont's avatar

By Gary Mont, April 11, 2012 at 2:43 pm Link to this comment

Korky Day wrote: “I’ve been saying this idea on several threads, with very little response.  Do you prefer to fail or do I not express myself clearly?”

Sorry Korky, but all your posts appear to be simple sales pitches designed to get folks to visit your website. Methinks other folks might be seeing it that way too.

I might drop by eventually, but at the moment I have a plate full of other stuff to attend to.

Thanks for the invite though.

Report this

By Korky Day, April 11, 2012 at 2:37 pm Link to this comment

This is a good discussion, except that it ignores my prodding for the various strategies to be tried and tested.

The best way to do that, in this Internet age, could be to accumulate support at a site like
http://www.pledgebank.com .

Any of the favoured strategies can be proposed there, including:
—Boycott undemocratic or all elections.
—Unify around an alternative candidate until they can surely beat the Duopoly.  (I like.)
—General strike.  (Gary Mont likes.)
—Petition for grievance.  (Gary Mont mentioned.)

I’ve been saying this idea on several threads, with very little response.  Do you prefer to fail or do I not express myself clearly?

Report this
moonraven's avatar

By moonraven, April 11, 2012 at 2:22 pm Link to this comment

Showed your true colors here, Gary.

Too bad.

You can keep your fatuous “emoticons”.

I don’t find phonies charming or funny.

Report this
John Best asks,

By John Best asks, "What IS Progress"?, April 11, 2012 at 2:14 pm Link to this comment

Gary, the exit plan you outline might be right.  I suggest they are reorganizing in Dubai as a forward operating base while infiltrating Europe.  But the culture here, as Giroux spells it out, has no problem worshiping and protecting these people.  They’ll never be forced to leave.  We can be turned against each other ad-infinitum.  We are already eating our own.

Report this
Gary Mont's avatar

By Gary Mont, April 11, 2012 at 2:03 pm Link to this comment

Ed Romano wrote: “He concluded that they all had one thing in common….when the people thought that their nation was at rhe height of its power and emminence the seeds of destruction were already well at work.”

As wealth accumulates in the hands of the few, they associate and discuss ways and means of increasing their intake of wealth, and eventually pool their vast resources to alter the laws of the land to make profiteering easier.

They then make it more difficult for anyone else to climb the same ladder that they used to get to the top.

Eventually, they gain so much wealth that they simply replace politicians, teachers, judges, etc., with their own employees and begin to rewrite the laws on the fly as needed to facilitate their greed.

Shortly thereafter, they will infiltrate and take control of all the institutions that might prevent their unchecked exploitation and this ends all dissent against their actions.

From this point on, its simply a matter of policing the population until they have been completely stripped of their belongings, health and dignity.

However, at this point, the damage is complete and the wealthy have only each other to steal from and the poor, deprived of life support, can no longer produce or buy the things that constitute sources of wealth for the rich.

Once the wealthy begin attacking each other, the nation falls.

I think this is how all those ruins strewn all over the earth came about. I believe it is a problem we are incapable of solving.

Report this

By heterochromatic, April 11, 2012 at 1:59 pm Link to this comment

—-I respect anarchists and urge them to unite and try to build up their numbers
so they can make an attempt to create anarchism——

anarchists unite, join together to form an unstoppable force that will suck so hard
that it’ll create an enormous vacuum and allow the return to pre-history and the
reformation of anarchy.

Report this

By Ed Romano, April 11, 2012 at 1:46 pm Link to this comment

John, Can’t argue with that. It’s all part of the chapter and verse that some future Toynbee will write when describing the Rise anmd Fall Of The American Empire. But,if you believe in the law of compensation the seeds may have been sown a few years earlier,when perhaps Nature decided it was time to pull the plug on the US after Truman fried a couple of hundred thousand civilians in Hiroshima and Nagasaki.

Report this
Gary Mont's avatar

By Gary Mont, April 11, 2012 at 1:45 pm Link to this comment

leefeller wrote: “We are seeing some consolidations of power and wealth never seen before, maybe this is the new world order?

In my opinion no.

It is the Old World Order.

It is the destroyer of civilizations that has always been here, waiting to dissolve all that people have built in order to enrich itself again in the feeding frenzy that can be witnessed today in the USA.

It is the disease of Lucramania recreating the dysfunction of fascism that brings about the end of all civilizations.

(Except of course the Western Indian Civilizations, which were destroyed by the invading European Whites, because that form of civilization was non-monetary in its construction. Is that better moonraven? smile

Its a cycle. One which we cannot stop because the children of those who gained all the wealth from the last cyclic destruction of a nation, always force any new civilization to follow the exact same path.

In my opinion, every government, regardless of its chosen label, is a capitalist government, since aquiring power through capital is always the purpose of the captains of any civilization.

Report this
Gary Mont's avatar

By Gary Mont, April 11, 2012 at 1:29 pm Link to this comment

moonraven wrote: “Gary: Do me a couple of favors, please?”

No.

Report this
Gary Mont's avatar

By Gary Mont, April 11, 2012 at 1:23 pm Link to this comment

John Best wrote: “Adn don;t neglect the people who will be enslaved as ‘law enforcement’ that is, private police for the parasite class.

Long ago in another place, I wrote that the Dark Ages was a case of the very wealthy giving the populations a simple choice:

        ==============================
Become a Soldier in our Army to terrorise and exploit the poor masses for our benefit, or join the poor masses and be terrorised and exploited by our Army.
        ==============================

You have to understand John, that by the time the parasites have stripped the land of all its wealth, they also hope to have destroyed most of the peasants through eternal war, disease and starvation. The beginnings of these pogroms are already being legislated into place. The reason for this is simply to eliminate the possibility of revolt until the last possible moment by the least possible number of peasants.

In fact, I believe the plan is to set the army against the last remnants of the population while the Parasites make their exit stage left. This will leave the armies - armed mercenaries mostly - to their own inclinations, and eliminate the need to pay them - the Cheney Plan.

After all, the one thing every nation provides, is human cannon fodder and Europe will be rich pickings once the USA is stripped.

Report this
John Best asks,

By John Best asks, "What IS Progress"?, April 11, 2012 at 1:14 pm Link to this comment

Ed, I’d say the game was over when in the Truman white-house they decided to ‘switch the wartime economy over to one of consumerism’.  That’s almost a direct paraphrasing.  Giving Madison Ave the keys to the peoples minds via television sealed the deal.

moonraven, you are easy to see and take offense.  Perhaps saying ‘America’ as in ‘The American Dream’ is lazy, but it is common parlance, and I don;t know about Gary, but the need to communicate clearly is more important than your hyper-sensitivity so I for one will not make any effort to be politically correct. 

By the way, you throw all us ‘white men’ in the same basket.  You;re probably too old to stop being a racist?

Hey, see what’s happened?  We are eating each other.

Report this
Leefeller's avatar

By Leefeller, April 11, 2012 at 1:12 pm Link to this comment

Gary, I have suspected and felt the indicator signs of fascism for some time now, especially after the Red States took on their offensive attacks on the middle class and poor, of course sponsored by the usual crowd of self entitled; the few, the wealthy and the opportunists via ALEC and Koch Bros.

You are aware of Britts 14 points of Fascism and the old Encyclopedia of Britannica Classroom film on despotism available on Utube? Are the 4 despot indicators really here?

We are seeing some consolidations of power and wealth never seen before, maybe this is the new world order?

Report this

By Ed Romano, April 11, 2012 at 1:01 pm Link to this comment

Gary, Was it Toynbee who studied the rise and fall of 16 civilizations ?  He concluded that they all had one thing in common….when the people thought that their nation was at rhe height of its power and emminence the seeds of destruction were already well at work. The US came out of WW2 probably the most wealthy and powerful of any nation that ever existed. In just one lifetime it has squandered that inheritance.
  By the time of the Vietnam War I would argue that the ball game was already over. And, if we had any chance at all of regaining influence or sanity or whatever you want to call it, it was lost when absolutely nothing was learned from that adventure…. So the door closed on this historical experiment long before 2001. It is just becoming more evident now as the runaway locomotive picks up speed heading down hill.

Report this
moonraven's avatar

By moonraven, April 11, 2012 at 12:56 pm Link to this comment

Gary:

Do me a couple of favors, please?

1.  Stop ripping off the name America to refer to the US.  There are a whole passle of other countries living in America—some of which are not only dead, but are up the upswing and will soon be dominant players on the geopolitical stage—if the US doesn’t decide to play dog in the manger and take the rest of the planet down with it into the sewers of history.

2.  Stop posting that the US died in 2001 when its Constitution died.  How can a rogue nation founded on genocide, landtheft and slavery—with a constitution written by practitioners of genocide, land thieves and slave-holders over have been anything but a Dead Man Walking, a zombie?

You are starting to sound like someone with a strong nostalgia for white power.

That’s a problem with these comment sites—folks start out posting sensibly and as they go along and post more their level of indoctrination, denial and empathic walls start to become visible.

And the kicker, sadly, always seems to be the unbreachable gap between the progressive mask and the racist within clawing to get out.

Report this
John Best asks,

By John Best asks, "What IS Progress"?, April 11, 2012 at 12:56 pm Link to this comment

Gary, thanks for the poke then.  Uh, I don’t think I am actually apologizing for the system or ever have, but apparently it sounds that way contrasted with the current context. 

Let me pick a cherry…....
“.......we are afraid to take a stand in the face of apparent overwhelming odds against us.”  emphasis added.  United we stand, divided we fall.  Problem is it’s so damn easy to create division.  They know where every cultural and sociological fault line is and can push in wedges effortlessly. 

By the way, that Henry Grioux article was chilling, and spot-on.  He makes scores of clear observations, and yet, there are so many interrelated facets to this, it begs for follow-up.

Report this
Gary Mont's avatar

By Gary Mont, April 11, 2012 at 12:43 pm Link to this comment

moonraven wrote: ”...that the US is in decline.

The US is dead. It died in 2001 along with its Constitution.

There is no point in attempting to resurrect its mutilated carcass - the effort will prove futile.

Instead, it is necessary to begin anew, build a better nation, based on the understanding of all the mistakes now realized as institutionalized in the old nation.

While such a feat is do-able, I truly doubt Americans are up to such an effort.

I truly doubt the future holds anything but pain and suffering for the vast majority of Americans and likely the world at large as well, once the parasites leave the American corpse and seek out greener pastures elsewhere, armed with the vast wealth stolen form America.

Those who have the wealth and position necessary to illicit change in the USA, are instead preoccupied with maintaining and expanding their wealth and position.

Wealth is an addiction and once attained, becomes the only thing worthy of consideration. All sense of humanity is lost when one needs to protect a vast horde of wealth from everyone who is not wealthy as well as all of those who are.

I like to think of it as Lucramania - the primary cause of Fascism.

I think it has been the cause of death of every nation on earth whose bones dot the landscape and lie buried beneath mounds and hills.

I believe its another lesson we will never learn.

But being the shit-disturber that I am, I cannot stop trying. smile

Report this
moonraven's avatar

By moonraven, April 11, 2012 at 12:35 pm Link to this comment

John,

I am growing weary of your deliberate obtusity.

Did you not read this part of my post to you?

“It makes sense to boycott elections in the US because they are an insult to the electorate—corporations simply BUY the president, governors and legislatures as once again an unelected body of mossback judges ruled that corporations are people and can therefore give as much as they want to election campaigns.  Votes are not audited nor auditable and absentee votes are routinely tossed in the trash can.  Voting machines can be programmed for whatever outcome is desired by the foks in power.  Voting is foolish under those circumstances, and to vote only indicates that you are a vote junkie.

If those are not obvious reasons for NOT voting, I am afraid you are a hopeless vote junkie—or you are being duplicitious.

I also find your comments about how we should not be discussing issues in public disturbing in its APPARENT cowardice and call for complicity with the enemy.  If I have misread you, please remember that I said APPARENT.

You have included in several posts a call to prudence and self-protection and I am wondering what your MOTIVE for that is.

When I have seen these kinds of suggestions in the past, on other threads and other sites, they have caused me to think that the poster in question is a US government-sponsored poster making less-than-subtle threats, as if you were REALLY that worried and you were legit, you would most likely be following your own advice and not posting here.

Something about you does not smell right to me.

And my nose is usually pretty reliable.

Report this
John Best asks,

By John Best asks, "What IS Progress"?, April 11, 2012 at 12:24 pm Link to this comment

Gary, I think we are already enslaved to run the food production facilities required to run various enterprises elsewhere and here.  We are enslaved in the mines, which will exist for many many years.  Sunlight hits the soils, though they are being depleted, humans will be required to eek out whatever production can be made.  The US won;t be depleted significantly faster than the rest of the planet, so, I’m not sure the ‘parasites’ will move to where resources are.  Resources are distributed globally.  I think the parasites will stay where it is culturally safe for them, and that’s here for now.  Adn don;t neglect the people who will be enslaved as ‘law enforcement’ that is, private police for the parasite class.  We the People are a source of bodies for all sorts of dirty work regardless of the level of resources.  Consider that perhaps the resources are merely an intermediate tool to manufacture the technologies to enslave.  For that, ‘they’ need our brains and brawn.  The real goal I suggest at any level of resources, is fot ‘them’ to stay on top.

Rule Britannia?

Moonraven, those weren’t slurs against Chaves, merely statement of fact, he is a popular and strong leader.  You are too sensitized to take offense where it is not intended.  I did not argue that Chavez isn’t a good leader, or say anything against him.  In matter of fact, I pointed out his popularity, as he was elected twice at least.  My statement ‘strong man’ was in contrast to another posters statement about Obama (I think) being strong man, and there is a degree of cult of personality there.  Stalin certainly is not the only ruler/leader with a strong (cult) of personality.  Now, you have smeared what I said and imposed a false interpretations based on your convenient prejudices.  That is not logical, and amounts to an attack on credibility. 

And, like Mark, you start with a string of name calling and character impugning. 

But, basically, when you get to your argument, it simply ‘does not follow’.  First you state, “One time the opposition boycotted the elections for National Assembly members—which in the case of Venezuela did NOT make sense as elections are more fair than just about anyplace else on the planet and which did not make sense as an opposition strategy even—as it left the opposition with ZERO representation in the legislature!”  Then go on to say the US should boycott elections on completely different grounds.  Again, the connection between Venezuela and the US situation does not make your case.

Can one of you supposedly non-trolls just state succinctly, the best case for boycotting elections?  What are the anticipated direct results and why do they follow?

Report this
Gary Mont's avatar

By Gary Mont, April 11, 2012 at 12:18 pm Link to this comment

To John Best,

Forgive me for poking you in the ribs sir.

I simply thought it best that you actually describe your position, so that I and others might understand where you are coming from better.

Your tendency to profess preservation of the system in the face of its apparent complete corruption, makes you look like a tried and true political apologist at times. This was not your position when I was last here, so i thought I’d poke and see what came up.

Thank you for your clarifications.

Your concern about publishing rebellious comments on blogs such as this are actually pointless. The people in power no longer need any sort of excuse to have a person disappeared, incarcerated, or shot. There is no secure communications system left in America that cannot be accessed on a whim by the Security State.

The war has already been declared. It is now in its second decade and we the people are losing because we are afraid to take a stand in the face of apparent overwhelming odds against us.

The truth of the matter is quite simple however.

The parasite wants your wealth and it wants you to deliver it too.

Stop buying and making its products and services and it shrivels and dies, exactly like a tumor after a patient begins smoking cannabis and the blood vessels feeding the tumor stop supplying it with nourishment.

Report this

Page 2 of 5 pages  <  1 2 3 4 >  Last »

 
Monsters of Our Own Creation? Get tickets for this Truthdig discussion of America's role in the Middle East.
Right 1, Site wide - BlogAds Premium
 
Right Skyscraper, Site Wide
Right 2, Site wide - Blogads
 
Join the Liberal Blog Advertising Network
 
 
 

A Progressive Journal of News and Opinion   Zuade Kaufman, Publisher   Robert Scheer, Editor-in-Chief
© 2014 Truthdig, LLC. All rights reserved.

Like Truthdig on Facebook