Top Leaderboard, Site wide
September 16, 2014
Truthdig: Drilling Beneath the Headlines
Help us grow by sharing
and liking Truthdig:
Sign up for Truthdig's Email NewsletterLike Truthdig on FacebookFollow Truthdig on TwitterSubscribe to Truthdig's RSS Feed

Newsletter

sign up to get updates






On the Run


Truthdig Bazaar
Life and Fate

Life and Fate

By Vasily Grossman; Robert Chandler (Introduction by)

For the Soul of Mankind

For the Soul of Mankind

By Melvyn P. Leffler
$13.60

more items

 
Report

America’s Political Cannibalism

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

Posted on Oct 13, 2008
AP photo / Gerald Herbert

The rage bubbling up from America’s impoverished and disenfranchised working class, glimpsed at John McCain campaign rallies, presages a looming and dangerous right-wing backlash.

By Chris Hedges

(Page 2)

The Patriot Act, the FISA Reform Act, the suspension of habeas corpus, the open use of torture in our offshore penal colonies, the stationing of a combat brigade on American soil, the seas of surveillance cameras, the brutal assaults against activists in Denver and St. Paul are converging to determine our future. Those dark forces arrayed against American democracy are waiting for a moment to strike, a national crisis that will allow them in the name of national security and moral renewal to shred the Constitution. They have the tools. They will use fear, chaos, the hatred for the ruling elites and the specter of left-wing dissent and terrorism to impose draconian controls to extinguish our democracy. And while they do it they will be waving the American flag, singing patriotic slogans and clutching the Christian cross. Fuld, I expect, will be one of many corporatists happy to contribute to the cause.

This is a defining moment in American history. The next few weeks and months will see us stabilize and weather this crisis or descend into a terrifying dystopia. I place no hope in Obama or the Democratic Party. The Democratic Party is a pathetic example of liberal, bourgeois impotence, hypocrisy and complacency. It has been bought off. I will vote, if only as a form of protest against our corporate state and an homage to Polanyi’s brilliance, for Ralph Nader. I would like to offer hope, but it is more important to be a realist. No ethic or act of resistance is worth anything if it is not based on the real. And the real, I am afraid, does not look good.

Chris Hedges’ column appears Mondays on Truthdig. Hedges, a Pulitzer prize winner and a former foreign correspondent for The New York Times, is the author of “American Fascists: The Christian Right and the War on America.”

Advertisement

Square, Site wide

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.

By Leisure Suit Larry, November 3, 2008 at 7:03 am Link to this comment
(Unregistered commenter)

Cyrena?

“Imagine the meltdown if old LSL had to come anywhere close to an acceptance of the fact that Barack Obama is the most qualified candidate for job”

Please tell me what makes him the “most qualified” candidate.

I get a chuckle about the “racist” label. The loony-left’s way of saying “shut-up.”  She and Cyr sound more like Faux News then either would wish to admit.

Please tell me this; Would George Wallace have taken the electorial votes of six states in 1968 were he black?  Is your answer racist?

Report this

By cyrena, November 3, 2008 at 1:17 am Link to this comment

Shenonymous writes to Leisure Suit Larry..

“..LSL says: Obama has one attribute which seems to trump all his inexperiance and failings that is his skin color. The USA is about to elect a man to the highest office of the land, because he is black. Are you playing the race card?  What a racist remark!  Are you a skinhead in a suit Larry?

~~~

Yep shenon…it IS an incredibly racist remark, but the trend of the comments from LSL shouldn’t have forewarned you. Skinhead in a LEISURE suit? It’s a frightful image.

People like LSL actually believe this stuff, because that’s what they HAVE to believe. Imagine the meltdown if old LSL had to come anywhere close to an acceptance of the fact that Barack Obama is the most qualified candidate for job, and his EXPERIENCE is what we need in addition to his intelligence and temperment, IF we’re gonna have another shot at survival. (despite the incredible stupidity of allowing Dick Bush to maintain a fascist authoritarian dictatorship for 8 years).

People like LSL must convince themselves that the only reason Obama will be elected tomorrow is because he’s black. They can’t allow themselves to believe the truth. It would literally kill them.

He’s right about this though…LSL writes to you..

“So you answer why we should elect another in a long line of snake-oil salesmen?  becaues we want to prove to the world that racism is dead in the USA.  It isn’t…and it won’t be in Obama is elected.”

~~~

Nope, we aren’t trying to ‘prove’ to the world that racism is dead in the USA. WE ALREADY KNOW IT ISN’T, AND SO DOES THE REST OF THE WORLD!!

The rest of the world knows that Barack Obama would have already won this election by a landslide, if he was NOT Black!! The election has only been as close as it has been for this long, because he IS Black, and because racism in America is foundational, and institutional. And no, it will NOT ‘go away’ when Obama is elected.

But, his election is our only chance at saving ourselves, (including the racists). So, it doesn’t prove that racism is dead in the USA. (Leisure Suit Larry is proof of that).

It’s just that the majority cares more about their own survival than they do about Obama’s race.

Report this

By Folktruther, November 2, 2008 at 10:45 am Link to this comment

I disagree, Leisure Larry, I think world socialism and democracy is possible, indeed, the only way it can be possible.  Classic marxism was formulated for Western polities, notably, as you point out, Germany.  To develop a theory for earthperson socialism it is necessary to generalize marxism. 

Especially the need to generalize the redistribution and control of wealth to the redistribution of POWER.  It is not merely necessary to take away the wealth of the ruling class, but their power as well, which of course is lagely based on their control of the means of production. 

Therefore we need a generalization of marxism to serve as a uniting ideology formulated from a world historical EARTHPERSON perspective, rather than from the Western perspective.  This is necessary for a leader grouping to form, on the order of the Western Internationals of Marx. 

This is the only way to unite the various cooperatives that Anarcissie has been advocating on a world basis.  Expanding marxist theory from the Western values to earth values would subvert the Western Worldview that has legitimated liberal Democracies the past few centuries.

Report this

By Leisure Suit Larry, November 2, 2008 at 8:55 am Link to this comment
(Unregistered commenter)

She says:

“There is no crystal ball about what way an appointee to the Supreme Court leans because the appointee doesn’t always turn out to be what is expected.”

Exactly. This is the point I made when you said:

“For a real change in the White House and the Supreme Court and a better life, vote Obama/Biden.”
History is replete with examples of which the best was Eisenhower’s appointments of William Brennan and Earl Warren. When Ike left the White House he was asked; “Did you make any big mistakes while president?”  His response was “Yes” “Two” “Both are sitting in the Supreme Court.”


On race:

There is one politically “correct” opinion.  it is “racist” or “sexist” to criticize any one who uses “race” or “Gender” to advance their own fortune. Humans are humans, amazingly competitive and clever to the nines. How else would an ugly, hairless, slow, weak beast evolve into the master of the universe? I probably am, in point of fact, a racist but not as you might imagine. I wouldn’t have voted for that half-wit white cow who ran against Obama in the Primary, on the other hand, I would have gladly voted for Colin Powell, or Douglas Wilder. I also would have considered Condoleezza Rice, she looks presidential, and seems to have a head on her shoulders, but I really don’t have enough information to make a firm stance.  There are some white folk who I would support too. Warren Rudman, Jeff Sessions,  Bernie Sanders are among these.

Obama is a lightweight, Biden is a tool for the banking industry. As well as saying “Obama is about to be elected on the \basis of “skin color” I could also say he is about to be elected because he is NOT GWB. But some of his positions are remarkably similar…. on bank bail-outs, immigration, free-trade, and the list goes on.

So you answer why we should elect another in a long line of snake-oil salesmen?  becaues we want to prove to the world that racism is dead in the USA.  It isn’t…and it won’t be in Obama is elected.

Report this
Shenonymous's avatar

By Shenonymous, November 1, 2008 at 5:47 pm Link to this comment

LSL says: GHW Bush gave us David Souter arguabally the most left leaning judge on today’s court.
Let’s see uh, What is your speculation about?  Nothing when one actually takes a look at it. Souter looked like he was leaning right when appointed.  There is no crystal ball about what way an appointee to the Supreme Court leans because the appointee doesn’t always turn out to be what is expected.  Now you didn’t really need me to connect those dots did you Larry?  Right-wingers gotta love’em.  If they can’t deflect the real issues, they attack a person’s race or character.

LSL says: Obama has one attribute which seems to trump all his inexperiance and failings that is his skin color. The USA is about to elect a man to the highest office of the land, because he is black.  Are you playing the race card?  What a racist remark!  Are you a skinhead in a suit Larry?  You gotta know Larry, I’m for gray people.  Complete miscegenation of the races.  Save the culture but give up the purity.  Yeah, you are so right that politics is a dirty game, I’d like it to get even dirtier.  So well.  We liberals can take it cause the circles that you seem to run in are cyphers and cyphers just don’t count, cause they are zeros. 

Let’s hear it for Black Obama, Yayyyyy! and let’s hear it for White Obama, Yayyyyy!

For a less than pearly pure white White House, vote Obama/Biden.

Report this

By Leisure Suit Larry, November 1, 2008 at 2:51 pm Link to this comment
(Unregistered commenter)

By Shenonymous, November 1 at 11:10 am #


LSL:  Souter usually votes with the liberal wing, though not as consistently as his predecessor.  He looked awfully like a conservative and fooled Bush.  Prior to Republican John Sununu’s recommendation, few observers outside of New Hampshire knew who Souter was, although he had been mentioned by The New York Times as one of Reagan’s four top nominees for the Supreme Court slot that eventually went to Anthony Kennedy.  Lack of a paper trail was seen by President Bush as a positive for Souter, because one of President Reagan’s nominees, Bork, had recently been rejected by the Senate due in part to the availability of his extensive written opinions on issues.  Bush claimed that he didn’t know Souter’s stances on abortion, affirmative action, or other issues. Hence he looked really really good.  What a joke.  Also the National Organization for Women opposed Souter’s nomination and held a rally outside the hearings to oppose his selection. The then-president of NOW, Molly Yard, testified that Souter would “end… freedom for women in this country.” Souter was also opposed by the NAACP, which urged its 500,000 members to write letters to their Senators asking for Souter’s defeat.  Despite this opposition and largely due to his lack of a paper trail, Souter won an easy confirmation compared to later Republican appointees.

so? What has any of this to do with the discussion about who No-Bama would appoint?

Liberals, gotta-love-‘em. philosophy 1: If you can’t keep up…. change the subject.

Kennedy appointed Byron White…. Bush appointed David Souter. People outside New Hampshire are not aware that a New Hampshire Conservitive is a different breed of cat from the Southern conservatives. 

Because the presidential candidates have all agreed not to discuss who or what they would appoint to the high (in more ways than one) Court; we’ll never know till the appointment is made. Democrats might persuade an appointment of one of the corporate whores who currently control that party.

Report this
Shenonymous's avatar

By Shenonymous, November 1, 2008 at 12:10 pm Link to this comment

LSL:  Souter usually votes with the liberal wing, though not as consistently as his predecessor.  He looked awfully like a conservative and fooled Bush.  Prior to Republican John Sununu’s recommendation, few observers outside of New Hampshire knew who Souter was, although he had been mentioned by The New York Times as one of Reagan’s four top nominees for the Supreme Court slot that eventually went to Anthony Kennedy.  Lack of a paper trail was seen by President Bush as a positive for Souter, because one of President Reagan’s nominees, Bork, had recently been rejected by the Senate due in part to the availability of his extensive written opinions on issues.  Bush claimed that he didn’t know Souter’s stances on abortion, affirmative action, or other issues. Hence he looked really really good.  What a joke.  Also the National Organization for Women opposed Souter’s nomination and held a rally outside the hearings to oppose his selection. The then-president of NOW, Molly Yard, testified that Souter would “end… freedom for women in this country.”  Souter was also opposed by the NAACP, which urged its 500,000 members to write letters to their Senators asking for Souter’s defeat.  Despite this opposition and largely due to his lack of a paper trail, Souter won an easy confirmation compared to later Republican appointees.

Report this

By Leisure Suit Larry, November 1, 2008 at 7:06 am Link to this comment
(Unregistered commenter)

SHE:
“For a real change in the White House and the Supreme Court and a better life, vote Obama/Biden.”

What historic record makes one believe a “liberal” Democrat will give us a liberal Supreme Court Judge?

Kennedy gave us Byron (Wizzer) White called by the ABA “The most conservative justice of the Twentith Century

GHW Bush gave us David Souter arguabally the most left leaning judge on today’s court.

Obama has one attribute which seems to trump all his inexperiance and failings that is his skin color. The USA is about to elect a man to the highest office of the land, because he is black.


By Bboy57, October 30 at 11:56 am #

“Just look at how many hoops Obama has had to jump through, just for a smidgeon of a chance!”

We must have been watching different campaigns. I thought the press was pretty easy on Obama, and the McCain Campaign was as good as their word, they did not bring up Reverend Wright.

Politics is a dirty game, and some people who had more claim to a place at this table were pushed aside and marginalized.

Report this
Leefeller's avatar

By Leefeller, October 31, 2008 at 11:24 am Link to this comment

Da Bronx,

Person after my own, as an ole union representative, with a some knowledge of labor history, workers have been a battling corporate special interests, the steel mills in the early 1020’s.  Big boys were able to buy enough advertising calling the steel workers communists, socialists and Bolsheviks, as usual the public voted against their own best interests their peers the steel workers.  The story continues today.

A takeoff from “Tao Walkers” post “we are all Indians now”, can also say “we are all Union workers now”. 

People vote against their own best interests time and time again, ignorance coupled with blind faith have been a great foundation for the constant manipulation of the masses.

Your comments about workers being abused brings back uncomfortable memories.

Report this

By Da Bronx, October 31, 2008 at 6:16 am Link to this comment
(Unregistered commenter)

Cyrena

“In the old days, nearly all industries had ‘perks’ for the workers of whatever the industry was.”

Really?

To which “old days” are you referring?

The workers in the chicken indrustry were not allowed to leave the line for any reason, many of the older minority woman who worked the line wore diapers to work.  The company wouldn’t even pay for washing uniforms the workers took them home and washed them (1980’s-1990’s)When the textile mills left New England for South Carolina, they were looking for a “non-union” workforce they could exploit the treatment of their workers resulted in the largest boycott in US history. See the book “Don’t Sleep with Stevens”(1960’s-1980’s)

There were the Farm workers in the 50’s, (See CBS documentary “Harvest of Shame”) “Rosie the riviter from the ‘40’s Steinbecks Cannery Row from the ‘30’s, The Pullman porters in the ‘20’s, The Bread and roses strike of the teens, and on and on.

Companies never “give” workers anything. “perks” (as we refer to them today) like weekends off, the eight hour day, bathroom breaks, and fair wages were TAKEN from companies which used every means at their disposal to avoid giving them.  Ford himself (lionized here for the $5 day used race, the pinkertons and outright murder to keep the Union off his lines. Oh, and the “day” Ford paid $5 for was 12 hours long without a lunch break.

Report this

By Bboy57, October 30, 2008 at 12:56 pm Link to this comment

LSL:

You stated it wrong. In democracy, the rich are Still able to impose/inflict their will on the MAJORITY(coersion).

Just look at how many hoops Obama has had to jump through, just for a smidgeon of a chance!
Whereas the Gop’s, who shouldn’t stand a chance still are on the political radar after their debacle.

So the torture of the American mindset continues.

Report this
Tony Wicher's avatar

By Tony Wicher, October 30, 2008 at 11:57 am Link to this comment

Everybody has to watch this! Obama and Bill Clinton together, two rousing speeches at a midnight rally in Florida, first Obama and then Clinton. What a one-two punch! Great stuff!

http://www.thisweekwithbarackobama.blogspot.com/

Report this

By Leisure Suit Larry, October 30, 2008 at 10:32 am Link to this comment
(Unregistered commenter)

ITW

He should rather have looked at the American idea that there is a social contract, called the Constitution

Yeap, a document which (in 1848) allowed one man to own another, denied woman the vote, allowed workers to be flogged by their employers, and children to be put to death. 

It is hard for US citizens to accept, but in 1848, Germany (with all her faults) was morally superior to us. Marx’s disgruntlement stemmed from Germany’s retreat from one of her short ventures into individual representation (no where near democracy), but Marx did not see “democracy” as a solution. In “democracy” the powerful still are fully able to inflict their will on the minority

Report this
Shenonymous's avatar

By Shenonymous, October 29, 2008 at 8:09 pm Link to this comment

Tony WIcher, on points 1, 2, 3, and sort of a 4 YOU ARE SOOOOO RIGHT!  The news media are really lame.  Your post is very much appreciated.

 
For a real change in the White House and the Supreme Court and a better life, vote Obama/Biden.

Report this
Tony Wicher's avatar

By Tony Wicher, October 29, 2008 at 7:58 pm Link to this comment

Re Shenonymous, October 29 at 2:22 pm #

This comparison of the Obama and McCain economic policies leaves out several major differences.

1. Tax policy: Obama wants to raise taxes on the rich and give the non-rich a tax cut. McCain wants to give the rich more tax cuts and have the non-rich pay for it by cutting government services.

2. The Iraq war: Obama plans to end the war in Iraq and use the money for domestic purposes. McCain calls for staying in Iraq forever and continuing to spend 10 billion a month there.

3. Health insurance: Obama’s health insurance policy will bring down the cost of health insurance by forcing private medical insurance companies to compete with a government-provided one (the same one that covers members of Congress such as Obama himself, as he has promised). If the price of government-provided insurance is low enough, everybody will get it, private insurance companies will be out of business and we will thus get to single-payer by the back door. If private insurance companies want to stay in business they will have to provide as good or better insurance as the government does at a lower price.

McCain’s health insurance plan, a five thousand dollar tax credit paid for by taxing employer-proviced health care benefits, on the other hand, does nothing to control health insurance costs and is nothing but a boon to private health insurance companies. It will result in more uninsured people and costs that continue to spiral up. It is an economic disaster.

Report this

By Inherit The Wind, October 29, 2008 at 7:22 pm Link to this comment

Cyrena,

We are in agreement.  What’s wrong can be described in the old lament “The Shoemaker’s children have no shoes.”

LSL: If the foundation of your argument isn’t correct, you cannot draw the conclusion.  Marx WAS reacting to mid-19th century capitalism, and thought its excesses were due to its inherent contradictions.  He should rather have looked at the American idea that there is a social contract, called the Constitution, and THAT contract allows everybody to FORCE corporations and industries to abide by that contract.

That’s all we really have to do: Force corporations to abide by the Social Contract.  All this crap about “deregulation” means they don’t want to abide by the Contract.  And that is ALL regulation should do, but no more.

Report this

By cyrena, October 29, 2008 at 5:58 pm Link to this comment

“...Going further: Workers at NASA can’t afford to buy their own rockets…and don’t expect to.  Neither can workers at Boeing or Gulf Stream be expected to buy the planes they build…”

~~~

You’ve certainly got a point here ITW, so I acknowledge and appreciate the ammendment. And no, I certainly DON’T expect the workers at NASA to be able to afford to buy their own rockets, (though it might be not be a bad bennie to negotiate for wink) but you did get my basic point, since of course I had in mind basic goods and services.

Still, a version of the Henry Ford theme exists (or used to) in other industry services like my own former industry of transporation services. We certainly couldn’t afford to buy the physical fleet that generated the corporate profits, but we were able to utilize the services at greatly reduced prices. Now that certainly doesn’t take the place payment for a living wage, because nobody can eat air travel or clothe themselves in it. But, it’s a great supplement to an education, or maybe even a replacement of, when the real deal cannot be afforded in status-quo or establishment venue.

Meantime, that’s still the key to it all in my own opinion..how we treat each other as the workers we are, whatever our particular genre happens to be. In the old days, nearly all industries had ‘perks’ for the workers of whatever the industry was. I think that was an excellent idea, because the ‘perks’ were IN ADDITION TO a living wage. So the auto workers got discounts on their cars, and the teachers got free (or reduced)tuition expenses for their kids, (I guess, I’m just making this up as I go along) and other groups of workers or professionals give each other reciprical benefits. I can think of many circumstances like this, and it might be an interesting project for some time down the road.

HOWEVER, the whole system has been so inverted that now, these corporate entities are using this ‘benefit’ system in lieu of a decent wage. And, that began at least 2 decades ago in my own industry, along with the oursourcing of jobs and the creation of the 2 and 3 tiered wage structures. So they go from paying real wages to paying in benefits, (‘benefits’ being quite relative here) and eventually, they eliminate the so-called ‘benefits’ as well, or make them bureaucratically impossible to utilize.

All of that said, I do get your point.

Report this
Tony Wicher's avatar

By Tony Wicher, October 29, 2008 at 3:36 pm Link to this comment

Re Leefeller, October 29 at 10:43 am #

North Korea, is Marxist in the same way we are Democratic, a half arsed example. Despot Marxist compared to corporate democracy?
——————————————————————————
Leefeller,

I don’t think this comparison is apt. The United States is not completely democratic, but it is somewhat democratic and can become more democratic as we the people continue to seek a more perfect union. To me, democracy = socialism in the deepest sense of the words. North Korea is some kind of weird dictatorship or personality cult or monarchy which is as about far from both democracy and socialism as you can get. Now if the Republicans manage to steal this election somehow and the last vestiges of democracy here were stamped out, then there will be more of a comparison.

Report this
Shenonymous's avatar

By Shenonymous, October 29, 2008 at 3:22 pm Link to this comment

As of April 2008, the US owed Japan $600 billion, China $500 billion, the UK $250 billion. All countries outside the US put together add up to $2.6 trillion not $10 trillion as was exaggerated elsewhere. The majority of the US national debt is owned by various US investors and US government trust funds.

Obama vs. McCain on the national financial disaster
Interpreted from an Ezine Article Oct. 29
Housing and Credit Markets
Both candidates supported the most recent Economic Stabilization bill which aims to help improve conditions in the financial markets. Historically, McCain has been a stronger supporter of deregulation although he recently hedging his bets he proposed that the federal government should buy mortgages from banks in order to provide home owners with better terms, helping them to stay in their homes. The plan seeks to shift home owners from adjustable to fix rate mortgages. Obama, on the other hand, supports a tax credit for the middle-class which would increase home ownership deductions. Both candidates support stricter regulations of Wall Street financial practices.

Energy and Trade Policy
A major difference between the candidates are their differences in trade and energy policy. While McCain generally supports free trade, increased oil drilling and the expansion of international trade agreements, Obama has sought to revise existing trade agreements with a focus on labor standards, environmental regulations and carbon emission caps. Both candidates oppose drilling in the Alaskan ANWR region, as well as supporting mandated caps on carbon through a market mechanism. Obama, however, has placed a greater focus on fostering renewable energies, while McCain believes that a shift toward nuclear power offers a more viable short-term solution.

While both presidential candidates enter the campaign’s final week promising to be the better fiscal steward, each has outlined tax and spending proposals that would make annual budget deficits worse, analysts say, with Senator John McCain likely to create a deeper hole than Senator Barack Obama would.

Republican McCain, has proposed bigger tax cuts. He has also promised more in spending cuts, but he has not specified where most of them would come from. Even now that the financial crisis has given rise to one bailout package and prompted both candidates to call for billions more in stimulus spending, McCain has stuck by his promise to balance the budget by the end of his term, a pledge that fiscal analysts call unachievable.

Democrat Obama has vowed to reduce the deficit and put it on a path to balance. He also promises an expensive effort to make health care insurance more widely available, a raft of other spending programs and tax cuts for most families and small businesses. He would raise taxes on the wealthiest households to help pay for his health care plans.

Regarding the financial catastrophe, these are the two choices of candidates’ positions of those who will win the election.  All other analyses are moot.

Report this

By Leisure Suit Larry, October 29, 2008 at 3:15 pm Link to this comment
(Unregistered commenter)

ITW Blows again:

Sorry LSL: Spurious correlation.  Marx and Engels wrote the Manifest in 1848.  Bismarck didn’t rise to power until 1862.  Marx went on with his work and Bismarck simply rose at the same time.

The “sorry is annoying, You are NOT sorry (using your meaning.) You are one of those people who like to make war over a wart.

I was writing for the informed, you missed it.

Bismarckian Germany is a euphemism in history, generally considered to be the period from the ‘48 revolutions through the turn of the century even though Bismarck died in the eighteen-90’s the terminology is imaterial howeve.

The royalists and anti-democrats were assending to power, and Marx and his theology was the counterweight. Germany was an indrustrial super-power, and Marx wrote the manifesto for an indrustrialized nation.

The German people seemed to be anamored with the idea of fascism with brief periods of flirtation with semi-democracy until the Second World war.

Report this

By Inherit The Wind, October 29, 2008 at 2:32 pm Link to this comment

Leisure Suit Larry, October 29 at 11:07 am #
(Unregistered commenter)

Marx (A Prussian)designed “communism” (Communal ism) for Gernany under Bismark. Germany was at the time the formost indrustrial power in the world, a super-power nineteenth century style.
*****************************

Sorry LSL: Spurious correlation.  Marx and Engels wrote the Manifest in 1848.  Bismarck didn’t rise to power until 1862.  Marx went on with his work and Bismarck simply rose at the same time.

Report this

By Inherit The Wind, October 29, 2008 at 2:28 pm Link to this comment

This is in fact correct. The general theory at least is. Just as the second portion of it is wrong, (armed revolution isn’t going to right anything) the basic premise is that the worker should be able to afford the products of his/her own labor, regardless of what that (labor) is.

Even Henry Ford knew this. It’s not anything less than the basics of how a society operates best, and that is still capitalism. It’s just a version of capitalism that doesn’t collapse/crash from the inbalance. When the worker cannot afford to acquire the products of their own labor, the whole thing collapses, and we wind up with the same political structure/architecture that so many other societies have been subjected to.

It’s pretty clear I think, that it’s where we’ve been headed for a very long time. Having allowed it to get to this point, it will not ‘correct’ itself, but that’s not to say that corrections cannot be made.
*************************************

This needs amendment.  This Ford rule applies to items that can be considered a commodity.  One expects a guy building cars to be able to buy a car.  But should a guy building a Bentley or a Lamborghini to be able to buy a Bentley or a Lambo?  I certainly don’t expect that.  In fact, in luxury or high end items you cannot expect the workers to be able to afford them.

Going further: Workers at NASA can’t afford to buy their own rockets…and don’t expect to.  Neither can workers at Boeing or Gulf Stream be expected to buy the planes they build.

But for basic goods it’s certainly true. If you are making shoes or simple cars you should earn enough to be able to afford shoes and a simple car.

Report this
Shenonymous's avatar

By Shenonymous, October 29, 2008 at 1:57 pm Link to this comment

Leisure Suit Larry, yours is not an educated guess…the world is much too big for a dictatorship, too many standing national armies, too many corporations in competition, too many religious wing nuts, too many oceans, too many artists, actors, pop singers, too many bakeries, too many pig farmers, too many rodeo riders, too many sushi bars, too many Frenchmen, too many Icelandic hockey teams, too many .... the list is open to eternity.

Y’all are way too dramatic.  American politics will continue the way it has been, American economics will continue the way it has been, American morals will continue to be non-existent.  Why?  Because none of the arguments mean much from people sitting at their computers doing nuttin to change things.

Report this

By Leisure Suit Larry, October 29, 2008 at 12:07 pm Link to this comment
(Unregistered commenter)

Marx (A Prussian)designed “communism” (Communal ism) for Gernany under Bismark. Germany was at the time the formost indrustrial power in the world, a super-power nineteenth century style.

Many scholars believe that the failure of Marxist Communism (as opposed to Soviet Communism, Chinese Communism, or North Korean communism) is that it has never been attempted in an indrustrialized nation.

As to the idology itself, “communal-ism” survived in many countries for thousands of years. Nations such as the primeval Scandinavians. The Iroquois, the Bantu, the Hopi, and the abroginal Australians. Many of these nations survived ten times the life of the current USA.

Communial-ism far from being a dictatorship, is usually a true Democracy. Socialism/Communism are economic models Democracy/Totalitarianism are political models.

Communism has come to mean (in USA Lexion) Totalitarian Capitalism has come to mean “free”

Nothing could be further from reality.

capitalism, in it’s unregulated true form, creates institutions like slavery Poor-houses, debtor’s prison, and a distinct class system.

Communial-ism (when practiced as the Iroquois did) gives every one an equal voice, and equal share of food, and an equal level of responsibility for the tribe.

The truth is that all these (and more) idologies were meant to work where there were far fewer people. A world with 6.5 Billion people will never be a “democratic” or a “socialist” planet, but my guess is it will (eventually) be a dictatorship. “Freedom” is reserved for Nationa with undeveloped “Frontiers” Those are filling up rapidly.

Report this
Tony Wicher's avatar

By Tony Wicher, October 29, 2008 at 8:52 am Link to this comment

The social discontent and anger caused by poverty can lead to either progress or reaction, to sosocial democracy or fascism. This election will show which fork in the road this country is taking.

Report this
Leefeller's avatar

By Leefeller, October 29, 2008 at 8:43 am Link to this comment

Tony Wicher,

North Korea, is Marxist in the same way we are Democratic, a half arsed example. Despot Marxist compared to corporate democracy?

Report this
Tony Wicher's avatar

By Tony Wicher, October 29, 2008 at 8:31 am Link to this comment

ITW,

I don’t think we disagree at all, then. Marxism as a theory of governance where the free market has been eliminated has never worked anywhere. I would say that North Korea today is a fine example of where this theory leads.

Report this
Anarcissie's avatar

By Anarcissie, October 28, 2008 at 9:13 pm Link to this comment

Shenonymous: ‘Working a bit backwards from your post, Anarcissie, what modern empire has gone bankrupt?’

Since 1600 or so, Sweden, Spain, Portugal, Russia, among others.  After World War 2, Britain and France would have gone bankrupt but got out of the business in time (and were also bailed out by the United States to some extent; they became satellites).  The Austro-Hungarian, Ottoman, German, Japanese and Italian empires were destroyed by war, of course, but most of them were economically exhausted by the end as well.  The same is more or less true of the Dutch East Indies—the Japanese conquered them and set up an independent country which the Dutch were unable to defeat.  Relative to this, see The Rise and Fall of the Great Powers by Paul Kennedy.  Or, more conveniently, look up both in Wikipedia. 

’... I do not think poverty drives people toward fascism if you mean they take on the parameters of fascism as a way of thinking.  I don’t think fascism would even work that way.  It is the absolute rule of the few over the many.’

Well, there’s poverty and there’s poverty.  Capitalism tends to destroy everything in its path and create new things never seen before.  All that is solid melts into air, etc.  The sort of destitution which results from capitalist breakdown is more desperate because the foregoing period will have destroyed the old social institutions; then when the new ones also break, social chaos results.  Under such circumstances many of the desperate will go looking for a strong leader to save them.  For (recent) example, Putin, or in another age, Mussolini, Hitler or Perón.  These people may not be a majority but there are enough of them to be a potent political force and to staff a totalitarian state, as we can observe in recent history.

Report this

By cyrena, October 28, 2008 at 8:30 pm Link to this comment

Tony Wicher writes:

“...Everything that is happening right now in the economy proves that Marx was right about capitalism, viz. that unregulated, laissez-faire capitalism, such as we have seen during the last eight years, collapses from its own internal contradictions, as the rich get richer and the poor get poorer until the poor can no longer buy the products of their own labor. This we have seen many times. This Marx got right. Where he got it wrong was the idea that these contradictions could only be resolved by a violent revolution followed by a dictatorship of the proletariat and finally the withering away of the state. What we have seen since Marx is that the contradictions of the free market can be kept under control by proper government regulations and a tax structure that redistributes capital to create benefits and opportunities for working people so they do not become impoverished….”

~~~~~

This is in fact correct. The general theory at least is. Just as the second portion of it is wrong, (armed revolution isn’t going to right anything) the basic premise is that the worker should be able to afford the products of his/her own labor, regardless of what that (labor) is.

Even Henry Ford knew this. It’s not anything less than the basics of how a society operates best, and that is still capitalism. It’s just a version of capitalism that doesn’t collapse/crash from the inbalance. When the worker cannot afford to acquire the products of their own labor, the whole thing collapses, and we wind up with the same political structure/architecture that so many other societies have been subjected to.

It’s pretty clear I think, that it’s where we’ve been headed for a very long time. Having allowed it to get to this point, it will not ‘correct’ itself, but that’s not to say that corrections cannot be made.

Report this

By Inherit The Wind, October 28, 2008 at 8:09 pm Link to this comment

Tony Wicher, October 28 at 6:44 pm #

Inherit The Wind, October 28 at 9:31 am #

Marxism won’t fix it.  Marxism was a pretty idea concocted in the first half of the 19th century to address obvious abuses of workers in the early industrial age. It was designed to be compassionate and fair.  BUT IT DOES NOT AND NEVER HAS WORKED!
——————————————————————————-
ITW,

I beg to differ. Marxism has worked very well as a critique of capitalism. Everything that is happening right now in the economy proves that Marx was right about capitalism, viz. that unregulated, laissez-faire capitalism, such as we have seen during the last eight years, collapses from its own internal contradictions, as the rich get richer and the poor get poorer until the poor can no longer buy the products of their own labor. This we have seen many times. This Marx got right. Where he got it wrong was the idea that these contradictions could only be resolved by a violent revolution followed by a dictatorship of the proletariat and finally the withering away of the state. What we have seen since Marx is that the contradictions of the free market can be kept under control by proper government regulations and a tax structure that redistributes capital to create benefits and opportunities for working people so they do not become impoverished. This was made so obvious in the Great Depression that one might have thought it could never be forgotten, but the Republicans since Reagan have spent the last thirty years trying to forget it, and their success has the consequences we are now observing. More intelligent capitalists understand this “Marxist” truth which is why they are flocking to the Obama’s banner, even while the shortsighted greedy idiot capitalists call him a socialist as they once called FDR.
*****************************************

TW,
The only thing we disagree on in your post, is that I don’t think this proves Communism works, it merely points out that Marx was an acute observer of what was wrong, not what was needed.  Marx was actually the inventor of the field of Economic History, which continues to this day.

Report this
Tony Wicher's avatar

By Tony Wicher, October 28, 2008 at 7:44 pm Link to this comment

Inherit The Wind, October 28 at 9:31 am #

Marxism won’t fix it.  Marxism was a pretty idea concocted in the first half of the 19th century to address obvious abuses of workers in the early industrial age. It was designed to be compassionate and fair.  BUT IT DOES NOT AND NEVER HAS WORKED!
——————————————————————————-
ITW,

I beg to differ. Marxism has worked very well as a critique of capitalism. Everything that is happening right now in the economy proves that Marx was right about capitalism, viz. that unregulated, laissez-faire capitalism, such as we have seen during the last eight years, collapses from its own internal contradictions, as the rich get richer and the poor get poorer until the poor can no longer buy the products of their own labor. This we have seen many times. This Marx got right. Where he got it wrong was the idea that these contradictions could only be resolved by a violent revolution followed by a dictatorship of the proletariat and finally the withering away of the state. What we have seen since Marx is that the contradictions of the free market can be kept under control by proper government regulations and a tax structure that redistributes capital to create benefits and opportunities for working people so they do not become impoverished. This was made so obvious in the Great Depression that one might have thought it could never be forgotten, but the Republicans since Reagan have spent the last thirty years trying to forget it, and their success has the consequences we are now observing. More intelligent capitalists understand this “Marxist” truth which is why they are flocking to the Obama’s banner, even while the shortsighted greedy idiot capitalists call him a socialist as they once called FDR.

Report this
Shenonymous's avatar

By Shenonymous, October 28, 2008 at 7:42 pm Link to this comment

Working a bit backwards from your post, Anarcissie, what modern empire has gone bankrupt?  I agreed that part of the problem, probably a big part of the problem, is the deindustrialization of America.  I don’t know about not being able to “fix” the financial problem.  Seems money flows here and there by many means not known and not fathomable by the public and that public never will know.  Changing the financial machinations is beyond the average citizen, and in that department I list myself among the average.  I still think the .1% SDTs ought to be levied if only to bring in the “few” dollars to put into the system and to make the financial moguls have to pay for their money acquisition.  Whether that particular action makes a dent or not in the overall problem is moot far as I am concerned.  There must be and will be other measures as you are suggesting, but have not specified, that will have to be taken to begin to rectify the damage. 

Marx was dealing with a much smaller organism of working class, unless he was merely hypothesizing and not actually seeing his theory applied.  The immiserated “they” is still representative of a small population.  If your speculation is true that the poor are driven toward racism, fascism (this one I do not believe), and fundamentalism rather than socialism it may indicate inherent weaknesses in that particular brand of socialism.  That the poor may be oppressed and forced to live under fascist regimes I cannot argue against.  If that is what you mean by being driven towards.  I do not think poverty drives people toward fascism if you mean they take on the parameters of fascism as a way of thinking.  I don’t think fascism would even work that way.  It is the absolute rule of the few over the many.

Report this
Anarcissie's avatar

By Anarcissie, October 28, 2008 at 6:54 pm Link to this comment

Shenonymous: ‘A categorical mistake is to think the “working class” in America is a homogenous group.  The reason why the “workers have not taken over” is they are as diverse as there are flavors of ice cream. ...’

Marx didn’t postulate a uniform working class, at least not in the material I’ve read.  He did think, however, that they would be “immiserated”, and thus be forced to revolt and take over the political and economic system, and this is exactly the process we are observing today—the rich are getting (comparatively) richer and everyone else is getting poorer.  Hence, some Marxists theorize that Marx’s predictions are only beginning to come true; this has to do with the totality and universality of capitalism.  Unfortunately poverty seems to drive people toward racism, fascism, and fundamentalism, rather than socialism.  Not too much sober sense has been in evidence in the last 100 years or so.

‘The Nader .1% on SDTs Fix of the budget deficit from the collapse of the financial world that would provide 500 billion in one year may not “fix” the problem in one year, but it will in a few years and can even approach the so-called 3 trillion dollar loss noted in this forum. ...’

No amount of money will ever fix the problem, because the problem is that the U.S. spends more than it takes in, borrows publicly and privately to make up the difference, is selling itself to foreign companies and people, is deindustrializing, is destroying itself as a market (see above), and until recently was inflating credit in order to mask the deficiencies.  All that has to change or the U.S. will go bankrupt.  Otherwise, taxing this or that will just be like bailing out a sinking boat by throwing water from the bow to the stern and back again.  Most modern empires have gone bankrupt if they weren’t destroyed by war, so that will not be a surprising outcome.

Report this
Shenonymous's avatar

By Shenonymous, October 28, 2008 at 2:27 pm Link to this comment

A categorical mistake is to think the “working class” in America is a homogenous group.  The reason why the “workers have not taken over” is they are as diverse as there are flavors of ice cream.  They are not organized as a whole group, even though there are some unions left these days that represent a spectrum of labor structures.  So it is not surprising that socialism has not taken and deep root in America.  That does not mean that a capitalistic society such as is had in America is permanent, we have heard the crushing collapse of it for the last few weeks and even now it is happening as we post here on Truthdig.  As workers ( laborers do not make up the entirety of the category of workers) become educated by either schooling or internetting, as to how they are exploited, change will happen and it ought not to be too surprising if that change isn’t cataclysmic.  Sometimes learning happens all at once and a huge societal awakening happens.  Since information is now instantaneous and people are notoriously reactive, nothing in the way of changes should be surprising.

The Nader .1% on SDTs Fix of the budget deficit from the collapse of the financial world that would provide 500 billion in one year may not “fix” the problem in one year, but it will in a few years and can even approach the so-called 3 trillion dollar loss noted in this forum.  It is still a good idea to make those who have benefited and skinned the publics ass over the years pay for it.  It would be a good idea to make it a permanent tax to offset any future losses due to mismanagement.  That should give the Republicans apoplexy.  The “extra” money made after the huge debt is paid back could be re-invested to make money just like the scummy bastards did who skimmed the system to the tune of hundreds of billions.  Or it could be used to pay back China who loaned the Bush Administration billions to pay for the Bush War in Iraq.  It could be put to good use somehow.  And as you know Tony Wicher, I am not a big Nader fan, but if the guy has good ideas, it would be stupid to not consider them and give him the credit.

Report this
Anarcissie's avatar

By Anarcissie, October 28, 2008 at 12:29 pm Link to this comment

As far as I know, Marx himself did not have any plan for implementing socialism or communism.  In the Communist Manifesto, he appears to envision power passing automatically to the working class when the bourgeoisie collapsed, whereupon the former, with “sober senses”, would rationally take charge and put things in order.  Although capitalism has collapsed a few times since, one must agree that the workers have not taken over.  Otherwise there is not much there to work or not work.

Report this

By Inherit The Wind, October 28, 2008 at 10:31 am Link to this comment

Anarcissie, October 27 at 10:21 am #

Incredible as it may seem, 500 billion dollars is not going to pay for the financial crisis.  The financial crisis is part of the deflation of huge bubbles in the real estate and equities markets.  Moving funny money from one point to another may keep some banks nominally solvent, but it’s not going to cure the problem.
****************************************************

Absolutely correct!

Let’s not forget that Bush & co’s deficit has been bleeding $500 Billion out of the credit market EVERY YEAR for 6 or 7 years.  That’s $3 TRILLION dollars, folks, that we (the USA) borrowed just to pay for our budget because the Re-thugs wouldn’t tax the wealthiest. (and don’t forget the 10’s of billions in interest on that) Yeah, $3 Trillion bled out of the world’s credit system and anyone WONDERS why it collapsed?

But like a house that collapses when you pull out the supports, you can’t just put them back and expect the house to stand up again…it doesn’t work that way.  Instead, it has unintended consequences.  When commercial paper isn’t available, a business goes under and all its employees are out of work.  When that paper is available, again, the business is gone.  Its suppliers and customers that depend on it are hurt too.  Maybe they go under as well from the lack of commercial paper. They were sound businesses, they just needed a revolving credit account to smooth over when they spent to fill an order and when they were paid.

So the car dealerships start closing…now when people can afford cars again, they are not there.

Out west, just as Ayn Rand predicted in 1957, when the wheat crop came in, there weren’t enough grain cars to move it—nobody had invested in them for 10 or 20 years.

Another stupid analogy: You burn down the house, putting out the fire doesn’t rebuild it.  Bush&co;waited too long, had the wrong solution, and now, even when he CAN counteract much, Paulsen won’t use the power he has correctly—he’s still hung up on neo-con theology.

Marxism won’t fix it.  Marxism was a pretty idea concocted in the first half of the 19th century to address obvious abuses of workers in the early industrial age. It was designed to be compassionate and fair.  BUT IT DOES NOT AND NEVER HAS WORKED!

Report this
Anarcissie's avatar

By Anarcissie, October 27, 2008 at 11:21 am Link to this comment

Incredible as it may seem, 500 billion dollars is not going to pay for the financial crisis.  The financial crisis is part of the deflation of huge bubbles in the real estate and equities markets.  Moving funny money from one point to another may keep some banks nominally solvent, but it’s not going to cure the problem.

Report this

By Leisure Suit Larry, October 27, 2008 at 10:35 am Link to this comment
(Unregistered commenter)

Nader might be able to get such ideas actually implemented if he would join the Obama campaign and administration instead of opposing it.


WHY would he want to do that?  The politicians running for office within the major parties are sewer scum. They wouldn’t agree to tax themselves.. Don’t you folks get it?  It was Obama McCain, and their class who profited in the nineties, and who are responsible for this mess. Obama and his friends at Freddie and Fannie are the cause, and it wasn’t an accident.

It is all laid out in this month’s edition of Mother Jones.

Report this
Tony Wicher's avatar

By Tony Wicher, October 27, 2008 at 9:05 am Link to this comment

By Shenonymous, October 25 at 5:24 pm #

Hey Ralph Nader had a great idea about how to pay for the f*cking financial fiasco.  Just charge a .1% tax on security derivative transactions and in one year it will generate 500 billion dollars, thus making those who profited from America’s treasury bailout by paying it back in a manner of speaking.  Funny I haven’t heard any response to this brilliant solution, not even from the Truthdiggers who are supporting Nader.
——————————————————————————-
Shen,

I didn’t know about this suggestion, but I think this is a fine idea. As you know, I am totally opposed to Nader as a presidential candidate, but I do think he has many fine ideas, of which this is one. Nader might be able to get such ideas actually implemented if he would join the Obama campaign and administration instead of opposing it.

Report this
Anarcissie's avatar

By Anarcissie, October 26, 2008 at 6:39 pm Link to this comment

It seems to me that capitalism, which I think is probably an inevitable development in human culture, cannot be considered a “mistake” because that would indicate there was some kind of individual intelligence plotting and planning human development.

My theory, which I have not worked out in any great detail, is that as human technology and wealth increase, more and more energy becomes available to humans of all classes and types.  (I’m using energy very loosely here.)  In the Middle Ages, the main energies available were military power and agriculture; there was mechanical technology but it was still peripheral.  However, at a certain point enough wealth, technology and economic activity were available to allow towns of capitalists to arise.  As the new energies were fed back into the system, the towns (that is, the capitalists) grew more and more powerful and burst the bonds of the feudal system.  This was the revolutionary process of capitalism which Marx describes so poetically in The Communist Manifesto.

The peculiar thing about capitalism is that as each phase ground to a halt, a new form of capitalism arose which devoured the old.

Marx seems to have looked forward to a point where enough technology (mechanical and social) and enough power and wealth would be dispersed among the working class so that, during the downfall of the last period of capitalism, instead of a new form of capitalism arising, the workers would simply take control of the system—socialism.  Obviously this hasn’t happened yet; there seems to be a lack of the “sober sense” Marx relied upon to get the workers to take up the burden of running the world.

Report this
Shenonymous's avatar

By Shenonymous, October 26, 2008 at 8:37 am Link to this comment

It is not a matter of a simple conception of Marxism.  There are different species of marxism just as there are different species of warm-blooded animals.  It is wise to learn the distinctions and be able to discuss them as they are defined.  I agree that capitalism has bercome a blight on human society and that a baronial system cannot succeed without a heavy totalitarian power structure.  I favor social democracies over all others and believe that the world would be better off to get rid of all kings and queens of every stripe and variety.  One man/woman one vote is the only correct structure.  And this is by social agreement.  Republicanism of representative government is no longer necessary with the advent of instant voice. 

It should be within the province of human interaction to try to convince others of particular ideologies but equal time must be given to opposing views.  The people then should be left alone to make their choice, a simple majority rules.  Those who lose must wait until they have better arguments to win the majority.  Then and only then may each man/woman stand for a civilized and self-satisfactory way of life.  What of those who cannot make choices due to some mental deficiency?  They are those who will have to live under the outcomes of those who have sufficient mental capacity.

Report this

By Folktruther, October 26, 2008 at 8:01 am Link to this comment

The American electoral process has always been sharply biased in favor of the power structures favored groupings, the richer, whiter, older, males. It costs money for a working person to wait in line for hours, and in any case sometimes can’t get off of work to do so.  That is why election day is on Tuesday rather than on the weekend.

It is why the election information is disseminated through the internet and newspapers, which the poorer population does not get.  There are enumerable sources of this class and racial bias and it is supported by both the Gops and, to a lesser extent, the Dems. 

The Dems, by disinfranchising the poor minorities, avoid issue conflict with the power structure that funds and medias them.  Their function is to serve the interests of power while pretending to serve the interests of the population.  Since Americans inherit their party preference from their families, like their religions, we cannot think in a more holistic way about power relations when these simple holistic truths subvert our inherited misconceptions about power.

                  ***

Capitalism, and the Western tradition that legitimates it, is an historical mistake, Ms. S.  An aberration that has caused untold suffering to the people of the world.  The notion that merchants, bankers and industrialists can actually rule a people, when their training, experience and values are focused around the profit and loss of money, is so absurd that the space peoples of the galaxy must be laughing their heads off at the aburdity of the human condition.

But the problem is that the earth is increasingly an integrated whole, and therefore must change as an intergrated whole to go to the next stage, whatever it turns out to be.  The idea that Europe, a pininsula off the Asian mainland, which the West has established absurdly as a ‘continent’, could rule the people of the world, or that the US could, is basically a power misunderstanding, based on murderous weapons. And not on Freedom and Democracy, as Huntington has pointed out.

The world ideology succeeding marxism in the 20th century will break out of the Western worldview and conceive the past, present and future persons of the earth as a holistic entity.  The simplifying conceptual structure of the natural sciences can be applied in social science, but only at the price of subverting the Western scientific ideology that legitimates it. 

These simple conceptions, expressed in both words and math symbols, generate an earthperson worldview, as I think of it, incompatible with the Westtern worldview.  A conceptual revolution in social science, similar conceptually to the great scientific revolutions, would transform our worldviews of reality, legitimating a worldview incompatible with the Western worldview.

Report this

By Leisure Suit Larry, October 26, 2008 at 7:12 am Link to this comment
(Unregistered commenter)

She

“No real effort to get poor people to vote.  But then, poor people don’t count, do they?”


Once upon a time, I would have agreed, BUT today the responsibility for getting “poor people” out to vote rests with those voters…the poor people.

I have no interest in getting any “poor” folks out to vote EXCEPT for the one poor folks who looks at me from my shaving mirror.

If “the poor” don’t vote they have only themselves to blame. The days when folks couldn’t get to the polls are over. Every state has some form of “early voting” and both parties have extensive “ride-to-the-polls” efforts.

The truth is that the truly poor don’t give a damn which party controls the White House Carter and Clinton did as much for “the poor” as Reagan and Bush…. that = nothing.

Report this
Anarcissie's avatar

By Anarcissie, October 26, 2008 at 5:20 am Link to this comment

Talking about voter suppression, a friend of mine who lives in Florida, Broward Country, voted yesterday; it took her three and a half hours, most of it waiting on line.  The voting process itself requires marking a complex printed ballot in three languages by thoroughly filling in little ovals with a pencil.  I expressed some concern about the difficulties and she said (about the authorities), “If people vote, it’s a problem.”  I thought there might be some trouble for the election officials about it in the future and she said, “Well, we’re used to that, aren’t we?”  It is interesting that, for all the talk about getting out the vote, there is so much resistance to people actually doing it.  If it were a matter of selling cornflakes….

Note that Broward County, Florida, is about the most Democratic county in the universe.  Things may be different elsewhere in the state.

Report this
Shenonymous's avatar

By Shenonymous, October 26, 2008 at 12:38 am Link to this comment

Alienation seems to be just about a right description for some folks who are unable to think about or evaluate reality.  I think there are those in Texas, north Texas that is, which where I live, however, who just don’t like either candidate and will vote their party of choice and not for a candidate per se.  I say that mainly because they were voting today in droves, the lines were amazingly long in the jumbo market where a dozen voting booths for early voting were set up.  The line wound from the front to the back of the store.  So I don’t think these people were alienated.

I agree that turning one’s back on the political process not only allows power structures to force their will, but forfeits rights once fiercely fought for.  Unfortunately it seems many do not see that connection. 

If you would name those liberal Democracies that you are criticizing Folktruther, it would be helpful to discuss in a reasonable way the ideology you say would be subverted.  It is too nebulous the way you put it.  If it is a “few centuries” of this happening, then you won’t have any trouble identifying them.  And exactly to what Western tradition are you referring?  You already know I savor good discussion but I also like to know what is being referenced.

Another problem I criticize the rich state of Texas for is that no sample ballots are ever sent out.  In a way, I believe, that is voter suppression.  It keeps the elections out of public consciousness and the rich elite in power.  I complained to the district election manager today, who happened to be where I voted.  He said “well it is reported in the newspapers and is on the websites.”  “Well,” I said, “there are lots of people who do not take a newspaper nor have computers.”  It is my guess tons and tons of people don’t.  I do not take any rag newspaper.  None of them are worth the paper they are printed on.  And I did not know the ballot was listed on the Internet.  I came from a state, California, that sends out a sample ballot even if only one referendum is being decided. For Texas, it is out of sight out of mind.  No mailings to remind people to vote.  No real effort to get poor people to vote.  But then, poor people don’t count, do they?

Report this

By Folktruther, October 25, 2008 at 9:38 pm Link to this comment

No political signs in your 20 mile drive is not a sign of progress, Ms S; it’s a sign of alienation.  It is not enough to turn your back on the political process; that allows the power structure to do what they want.

It is necessary to develop an ideology that bring people out of their personal lives into the community of people. I know that you agree.  But you may not agree that such an ideology will subvert the Western tradition that has legitimated liberal Democracies the past few centuries.

Report this
Shenonymous's avatar

By Shenonymous, October 25, 2008 at 6:24 pm Link to this comment

If you think you said anything of substance well think again.  Is it really important that the list gives Health Care twice?  Maybe it is needed so badly that it needed to be said twice.  Or maybe it deals with two different issues about health care?  Did you check it out before you made your criticism?  It is such a petty thing to point out anyway.  I really cannot abide minds concerned with such trivialities.  Get a life.

Your list of redundancies are just that, a vacant list.  At least I gave substance to the topics I listed.  Not all of them, since I am a working person and had to sign off, which I will finish tomorrow.  It is now late and I’m off to lala land. 

Most campaigns say a lot without saying much.  Again, what you said is trivial.  Not worth the time it took for you to type it. 

If both parties are working hard to steal the election that is nothing new.  We can just have fun laughing about whoever is elected being accused of stealing the election.  No biggie. 

Probably the next president will be in office for two terms even if they are as bad as GWB. 

I am not as bleak or as cynical as you are about the future, Leisure Suit Larry.  If Obama wins, and I fully expect he will by a landslide, he will be the agent of change we are counting on.  And money for the social programs, well GEORGE BUSH MADE SURE THERE IS NOT A F*CKING DIME LEFT.  We will just have to figure ways to get it back:  maybe from the greedy rich folks who enjoyed the Bush HeyDay, like TAXING THE RICH, keeping the Death Tax (Inheritance Tax), and a whole bunch of other things (Hey Ralph Nader had a great idea about how to pay for the f*cking financial fiasco.  Just charge a .1% tax on security derivative transactions and in one year it will generate 500 billion dollars, thus making those who profited from America’s treasury bailout by paying it back in a manner of speaking.  Funny I haven’t heard any response to this brilliant solution, not even from the Truthdiggers who are supporting Nader.  I am truly shocked!).  I’m all for those kind of taxes.  After taking the legal deductions, I pay mine always without complaint because I know it takes money to run this country.  Who ever doesn’t think so is delusional.

I voted today a straight Democratic ticket here in the redneck state of Texass.  I felt very good doing that.  It was like giving the right-wingers the middle finger.  Sort of like those might feel who are going to vote for Nader.  You know what, Nader wasn’t even on the Texas ballot.  I thought that was stinky shit.  I wasn’t going to vote for him, but nevertheless he should have been on the ballot.

Also I did a survey as I drove to go shopping to day.  As expected, there were no Obama signs in anybody’s yard for a 20 mile drive, but neither were there any McCain signs.  In the mindless state of Texass, I think that is progress.

For a real change in the White House and the Supreme Court, vote Obama/Biden.

Report this

By Leisure Suit Larry, October 25, 2008 at 7:16 am Link to this comment
(Unregistered commenter)

She

You say my criticism is “carping”

I disagree in that it is the same criticism I have about the Obama campaign Lots of words saying little.

as to the redundencies:

Economic policy: / Homes, Mortgages, mortgage crisis, and Real estate industry/ Taxation

Labor rights: / Equal pay / Minimum wage

Foreign affairs: /Cuba / China / Darfur / Europe / Iran / Iraq / Pakistan / South Ossetia / Foreign policy / Foreign policy advisors / Foreign policy issues / Diplomacy and negotiations / Intelligence / Military / Nuclear proliferation / Foreign aid / Countries and regions / Afghanistan / Arab-Israeli conflicts / Armenian genocide / Trade / Israel and the Middle East conflict.

That’s enough, I think I’ve made my point. The list even has “Health Care” listed twice.

I believe in the vote, you should vote your beliefs. I will too, but in the end it won’t matter, both parties (according to the news) are working hard to steal the election. I really can’t say I know why, as whomever is elected will be gone in four years when the public realizes we were lied to (yet again) and no one can “fix” this mess save time… I’ll wager a long long time!

BTW social programs ... Gone.. no matter who wins… no money.  I’m OK with that.

Report this
Shenonymous's avatar

By Shenonymous, October 24, 2008 at 5:35 pm Link to this comment

Yeah, Leisure Suit Larry, it does matter what you or I think.  I haven’t voted yet.  And I am in communication with a lot of people who haven’t yet either.  My list came from an extensive biography in Wikipedia and the list is theirs.  If there was an overlap so what?  It is a carping criticism.  You only named one redundancy.  What are the others?  I have no need to take the list into the voting booth.  I’ve already gone over all the references and links.  There are positions I do not agree with but those will not change my intention to remove Republicans from office.  As far as I am concerned the bulk of the problems this country is suffering is on their heads.  And John McCain promises more of the same in spite of his demagogic yawling that he is the agent of change.  We’ve heard that squawk from Republicans before.  That is not to say that Democrats did not help them along.  I can only hope those Democrats up for reelection will be replaced by Democrats who will help President Obama fix the devastation the George Bush administration left in their wake. 

I’ve given all I am going to about Obama.  He is the brightest star in the constellation.  The information is there that refutes you, Outraged, and the rest of the anti-Obama cotillion.  I agree with ITW.  As much experience as McCain has in politics, his voting record and kiss ass pucker to the Republican party shifting his opinion to whatever he perceives will further his candidacy contrary to his claim of being a maverick disqualifies him as a flickering panderer in my opinion.  Nader isn’t even on the radar screen so not worth any discussion from me.

Report this

By Inherit The Wind, October 24, 2008 at 4:19 pm Link to this comment

Leefeller, October 24 at 1:23 pm #

ITW,

We all know the experience crap they keep dishing out is just hoping it will stick to the wall.  If anyone can learn on the job, it is Obama, he is leaps and bounds over McCain/Palin.  It is like comparing Obama to a rock or some inanimate object. McCain seems to be one continuous senior moment, and Palin is the classic opportunist extraordinaire addressing the mindless audience’s.  Even placing her on the ballot is most insulting to my reason, I do not believe I am alone?
***********************************

Don’t hold back! Tell us how you feel!

(and I agree with you completely…)

Report this
Leefeller's avatar

By Leefeller, October 24, 2008 at 2:23 pm Link to this comment

ITW,

We all know the experience crap they keep dishing out is just hoping it will stick to the wall.  If anyone can learn on the job, it is Obama, he is leaps and bounds over McCain/Palin.  It is like comparing Obama to a rock or some inanimate object. McCain seems to be one continuous senior moment, and Palin is the classic opportunist extraordinaire addressing the mindless audience’s.  Even placing her on the ballot is most insulting to my reason, I do not believe I am alone?

Report this

By Inherit The Wind, October 24, 2008 at 1:17 pm Link to this comment

The voters have elected only one Senator directly to the White House in 100 years, but obviously (in this election and the two previous) what the voters want matters little, if at all.
**********************************

Wrong. Harding was elected directly from the Senate in 1920.

I find the issues that you, and Outrageous et al use to justify NOT voting for Obama are as light-weight, IMHO, as Right-wingers not voting for him because he is Pro-Choice and pro-gay marriage.

Here’s a reason to vote for Obama: McCain will continue Bush’s dangerous economic and foreign policies that got us into this mess.  McCain will drop dead in office and Palin will be President.

Re-arranging the deck chairs on the Titanic doesn’t qualify ANYONE to be captain.  McCain has proven experience—proven that he STILL has bad judgment despite it.  Obama shows he learns and grows from experience.

Report this

By Leisure Suit Larry, October 24, 2008 at 8:05 am Link to this comment
(Unregistered commenter)

She

I think all this puts him in the ball park to qualify to run for president, and then to be president.

What you or I “think” really doesn’t matter much does it.

Obama has run no organization larger than a campaign. Never been a Governor, a corporate C.E.O. or a diplomat. He’s never “commanded” any force larger than his Senate staff,

Your list is extensive have fun in the voting booth, I have no was of knowing what you believe as Obama’s positions have changed on many of these issues over the short time he has been in public life.

He’s in favor of the death penalty (one of the reasons I will vote for someone else.

He favors “faith based initiavies” as an athiest I have to wonder about “equal treatment under the law” if I needed services

many of the issues I asssume you support are issues which I reject.  (I oppose allowing people who enter the country illegally being granted citizenship, or even a green card.)

many of the issues on your list are redundant

(disability rights
disability issues)

I assume this is done for effect, a tactic Obama uses on the stump.

I know some people find it amazing that others disagree on policy issues (I am opposed to institutional charity) but in a represenative republic, that is the reason for a vote.

All of this aside, my point is Obama is unqualified to be President. Nothing you have said changes this.

Left to his own devices he makes decissions like Biden (D) Citigroup, Wright and Rezco for associates.

The country has rejected Biden and his presidential bids no fewer than five times, but that doesn’t faze Obama in the least.  Sounds a bit like Bush’s Ashcroft appointment.

The voters have elected only one Senator directly to the White House in 100 years, but obviously (in this election and the two previous) what the voters want matters little, if at all.

Report this
Shenonymous's avatar

By Shenonymous, October 24, 2008 at 4:17 am Link to this comment

Part 1 Reply to Outraged
To reply specifically to your premeditatively cursive answers, the list is long because those are the things as a senator he must respond to. So I will qualify your criticisms for you. And thank you for the opportunity to make these clarifications.  If I’ve missed some I will cover these others later today as I have to go to work but like Arnie, I will be back. But you get the gist.

Death Penalty… he’s FOR it.
Regarding the death penalty: Obama has written that he thinks the death penalty “does little to deter crime.” He supports capital punishment in cases in which “the community is justified in expressing the full measure of its outrage.” While a state senator, Obama pushed for reform of the Illinois capital punishment system and authored a bill to mandate the videotaping of interrogations and confessions. Obama disagreed with the June 25, 2008 U.S. Supreme Court decision outlawing the execution of child rapists.

Economic Policy… he’s FAVORS “big business”
In 2006, Obama wrote: “We should be asking ourselves what mix of policies will lead to a dynamic free market and widespread economic security, entrepreneurial innovation and upward mobility [...] we should be guided by what works. [Obama] attitude is that if the economy’s good for folks from the bottom up, it’s gonna be good for everybody. I think when you spread the wealth around, it’s good for everybody. OBAMA FIRES A ‘ROBIN HOOD’ WARNING SHOT, New York Post, October 15, 2008

Corporate Governance…. he endorses it.
Will deal with later.

Equal pay… he’s not endorsed this…silence. [b/Wrong Barack Obama’s record as both a State Senator and US Senator indicates his ongoing support for the rights of women to be paid the same as men for equal work. See the http site at womensissues.about.com/od/obamaonwomensissues/f/ObamaEqualPay.htm

Minimum Wage… silence.  [b/Wrong Obama favored the increase in the federal minimum wage from $5.15 an hour to $7.25, and he voted to end the filibuster against a bill to accomplish that. # ^ U.S. Senate Roll Call Vote on Motion to Invoke Cloture on H.R.2
# ^ Bloomberg (January 25, 2007), “Effort to Move on Minimum Wage Bill Falters in Senate”, The New York Times

Education… endorses Charter Schools and vouchers, thereby undermining Public Schools and endorsing PRIVATE   EDUCATION…. i.e. monied interests. Wrong
In a February 2008 interview Obama said he supports charter schools “as a way to foster competition in the public school system,” and later he said he would double federal funding for charter schools if elected president. Obama’s campaign clarified his stance by issuing a release stating, “Throughout his career, Obama has voted against voucher proposals and voiced concern for siphoning off resources from our public schools.”

Energy Policy… endorses “clean coal” (as specious assertion) and nuclear energy (a damaging proposition)  I refer you to http://climateprogress.org/2008/10/03/is-the-biden-obama-position-on-clean-clean-coal-a-mistake/

Obama says that his religion has taught him the “importance of us being good stewards of the land” and given him a moral imperative to be less wasteful.

Report this
Shenonymous's avatar

By Shenonymous, October 24, 2008 at 4:11 am Link to this comment

Part 2 Reply to Outraged

October 2007, Obama proposed an energy plan that would require polluters to pay for their emissions via a “cap and trade” system and that would implement a national carbon emissions cap. In the U.S. Senate, Obama has co-sponsored the Climate Stewardship and Innovation Act to cap emissions from industrial plants and oil refineries. He supported a January 2007 meeting of a group of evangelicals and climate scientists to advocate measures to prevent global warming. Obama has also called for stricter restrictions on the amount of carbon in fuels and tougher fuel efficiency standards for cars. He plans to allocate $150 billion over the next 10 years to create a “green energy sector” that would support up to five million new jobs.

Homes, Mortgages, mortgage crisis, and Real estate industry…. CHOKED…sold out to the banking interests, fucked over citizens. Obama voted for the $700 billion Emergency Economic Stabilization Act of 2008. [50]

Obama introduced the Stop Fraud Act[3] to increase penalties for mortgage fraud by mortgage brokers and real estate brokers and to provide more protections for low-income homebuyers.

In regards to capital gains on house sales, Obama says he favors increasing capital gains tax above the present 15% rate to 20% for families whose income is above $250,000..  See Mark, Roy (November 15, 2007). “Obama Promises Federal Technology Czar”, eWeek.

Network neutrality and government use of information technology… voted FOR FISA, and using info tech AGAINST The People.
In a June 2006 podcast, Obama expressed support for telecommunications legislation to protect network neutrality on the Internet, saying: “It is because the Internet is a neutral platform that I can put out this podcast and transmit it over the Internet without having to go through any corporate media middleman. I can say what I want without censorship or without having to pay a special charge. But the big telephone and cable companies want to change the Internet as we know it.”[55] Obama reaffirmed his commitment to net neutrality at a meeting with Google employees in November 2007, at which he said, “once providers start to privilege some applications or web sites over others, then the smaller voices get squeezed out, and we all lose.”[56] At the same event, Obama pledged to appoint a Chief Technology Officer to oversee the U.S. government’s management of IT resources and promote wider access to government information and decision making

Faith based programs… proposes to EXPAND Bush’s “faith based initiative” thereby put TAXPAYER DOLLARS into the coffers of BLOATED religious institutions.  I do not agree with this plan but this is his statement, not yours, not mine.

In a July 2008 speech, Obama announced a plan to establish a Council for Faith-Based and Neighborhood Partnerships. It would expand upon President Bush’s faith-based initiative, primarily by allocating $500 million per year for summer learning camps that would aim to narrow the achievement gap between poor and wealthy students. Under Obama’s plan, groups receiving federal funding would not be allowed to take religion into account in hiring.
Foreign policy _Foreign policy advisors _Foreign policy issues I’ll take these three as ONE….. Choose war-hawks, such as Madeline Albright who said, “500,000 deaths of the Iraqi children” from sanctions was WORTH IT!  I could go on.  Wants to continue the war in Afghanistan.  Ignorant or propaganda, choose your poison.

Report this
Outraged's avatar

By Outraged, October 23, 2008 at 11:31 pm Link to this comment

Re: Shenonymous

Ready…  Here goes…

The things for which I have issue with Obama.

Death Penalty… he’s FOR it.

Economic Policy… he’s FAVORS “big business”

Corporate Governance…. he endorses it.

Equal pay… he’s not endorsed this…silence.

Minimum Wage… silence.

Education… endorses Charter Schools and vouchers, thereby undermining Public Schools and endorsing PRIVATE EDUCATION…. i.e. monied interests.

Energy Policy… endorses “clean coal” (as specious assertion) and nuclear energy (a damaging proposition)

Homes, Mortgages, mortgage crisis, and Real estate industry…. CHOKED…sold out to the banking interests, fucked over citizens.

Network neutrality and government use of information technology… voted FOR FISA, and using info tech AGAINST The People.

Faith based programs… proposes to EXPAND Bush’s “faith based initiative” thereby put TAXPAYER DOLLARS into the coffers of BLOATED religious institutions.

Foreign policy
Foreign policy advisors
Foreign policy issues   I’ll take these three as ONE….. Choose war-hawks, such as Madeline Albright who said, “500,000 deaths of the Iraqi children” from sanctions was WORTH IT!  I could go on.  Wants to continue the war in Afghanistan.  Ignorant or propaganda, choose your poison.

Your list is too long…....but you get the point.  And quite probably, my guess is YOU already KNOW this.  Since as it is, you seem the capable individual.

Report this
Leefeller's avatar

By Leefeller, October 23, 2008 at 7:34 pm Link to this comment

LSL,

Why don’t you wait four years and you can vote for Palin/Joe the Plumber. Should be qualifications enough for you, after we find out who they associated with and the big “if” they are true Americans.  Joe may move to Alaska and Alaska may have seeded (Palin for succession) from the Great US-A (United States minus Alaska) by then.

Report this
Shenonymous's avatar

By Shenonymous, October 23, 2008 at 6:08 pm Link to this comment

Who exactly is saying that if a black man is elected “we’ll all be one big happy family?”  That is quite a claim.  Exaggeration is an anemic argument.  It is all hearsay reportage and has no substance, LSL.  I have not heard from any of my white nor black friends we are going to be one big happy family.

Obama was selected by the Democrats via their convention process.  Somebody, a lot of somebodies, thought he was qualified.  It’s moot to argue whether he is or is not.  He meets the legal requirements regardless of asinine attempts to say he doesn’t. Idiot governors have been elected president (Reagan and Bush come to mind right away, you might have your own favorites).  Have to agree that the number of years in the Senate does not qualify either Obama or McCain.

I’m not concerned with the racism issue since I haven’t heard Obama say he had any problems with whites, maybe because he is half white, who knows why he doesn’t?  Obama has taken a position on all of the following, which is why I am voting for him.  Exactly which one(s) and why exactly do you take issue with them? 
Economic policy
Corporate governance
Labor rights
Minimum wage
Equal pay
Education
Energy policy
Health care
Homes, Mortgages, mortgage crisis, and Real estate industry
NASA
Network neutrality and government use of information technology
Taxation
Social Security
Lobbying and campaign finance reform
Immigration
Affirmative action
Trade
Faith based programs
Government waste
U.S. automobile industry loan guarantees
Foreign policy
Foreign policy advisors
Foreign policy issues
Diplomacy and negotiations
Intelligence
Military
Nuclear proliferation
Foreign aid
Countries and regions
Afghanistan
Arab-Israeli conflicts
Armenian genocide
Cuba
China
Darfur
Europe
Iran
Iraq
Pakistan
South Ossetia
Social policy
Abortion and contraception
Disability rights
Environmental policy and record
Native Americans
African Americans
LGBT issues
Sex education
Gun control
Death penalty
Civil liberties
USA PATRIOT Act
Warrantless wiretaps
Religion
Embryonic stem cell research
Marijuana decriminalization and medical marijuana
Parental responsibility
Disability issues
Environment
Foreign affairs
Health care
Israel and the Middle East conflict

Obama sponsored 136 bills since Jan 4, 2005. Two have become law. This does not reflect bills to which Obama contributed considerably as a cosponsor: the Coburn-Obama Federal Funding Accountability and Transparency Act of 2006, the Lugar-Nunn Cooperative Proliferation Detection, Interdiction Assistance, and Conventional Threat Reduction Act of 2006.  It does not include amendments to other bills, although in the Senate these are not required to be pertinent to parent bilsl and can for all practical purposes be bills in their own right.  Obama has co-sponsored 619 bills during the same time period.

I think all this puts him in the ball park to qualify to run for president, and then to be president.

Report this
Leefeller's avatar

By Leefeller, October 23, 2008 at 5:26 pm Link to this comment

If you want to talk racism and the problems as you see them, fine.  If you noticed I said your comments

LSL

Your basic comments, sounded like bigotry I never mentioned anything about racism. After you last comment, I understand your disliking them and maybe disagreement, but why are they important to you? 

We went through the whole Wright and Rezko thing with the Hillary kitchen sink bs. 

Guess it depends on your personal feeling of how much Obama is influenced by either Wright or Rezko. 

As far as Wright goes, I agreed with the full context of his “GDA” comment, so you are arguing with the wrorng person here.

Rezko, is a slime bag so he should be a Republican, and if you think he is influencing Obama, vote otherwise.  The Rezko connection is like the Ayres BS, has little relevance, except for mud slinging.

Report this

By Folktruther, October 23, 2008 at 5:19 pm Link to this comment

Outraged-let me second your outrage at Tony Wicher’s comment.  I see I have been taking him too seriously.  This comment is politically ding-a-lingy.

The strongest candidate the Dems had was Edwards.  Obama sold out more to wealth.  That said, he is obviously talented and intelligent and I don’t know if his race was crucial to his getting the nomination.  But it is not in itself racist to argue that it was.

Report this
Outraged's avatar

By Outraged, October 23, 2008 at 4:50 pm Link to this comment

Re: Tony Wicher

Your comment: “We white folks deserve a lot of credit for this. We can be proud of having transcended racial prejudice and having chosen by far the best candidate for the job regardless of race. We have proven that we are a thoughtful, enlightened people. Not only can we be proud of ourselves, the world will look up to us too.

Your comment is outrageous.  “We white folks deserve a lot of credit…?  Ahh….ah…. what!  That’s ridiculous and it requires placing the bar so low that a flippin miniature dachshund could clear it.  Look… I’ll use the illustration of gender, since this includes you.

As a woman, if a man says “Oh, see how GOOD I am to “allow” this or that thing for you”, job, fairness…whatever.  I DON’T applaud his idiocy. I am aghast at his ignorance, stupidity or BOTH.

My first premise is to wonder HOW (especially the ones who know me well), have the audacity…when I’ve beaten them out at every level and every turn, come to the conclusion that IT’S BIG OF THEM to consider me for something they don’t have EVEN a measure of basic skills in….?!  When they see my disbelief, they’re offended that I’m offended.  OMG….then I need a beer.

Your simplistic conclusion that we will be viewed as “an enlightened people” is without merit.  Has it occurred to you that possibly to the rest of the world, but most especially our own citizens that the FACT that we are FINALLY considering “someone of color” proves us unenlightened, backward and racist.

In addition, Leisure Suit Larry is not racist to point out that Obama might not be where he is if he were white.  We can’t deny the facts.  There are all types of racial overtones to this campaign, black and white.  And it would be a lie to say Obama isn’t getting some votes simply because he is black, and that McCain isn’t getting some votes simply because he is white.

We know that’s true.  We won’t know how true until after the election and assess the data.  In fact, Palin will garner some votes simply because she is perceived as a stalwart Christian, especially with single issue voters…i.e abortion.  On the flip side, ALL will lose votes for these same reasons.

Earlier in the campaign when Obama was likened to MLK, I thought it ridiculous.  If we look at the candidates PLATFORMS, Nader’s would more closely resemble the issues MLK endorsed, than Obama’s.

The picture you are painting here hasn’t any bearing on reality.  Should Native Americans view us as “enlightened” when/if we ever allow ANY of their insight to see the light of day, in any REAL way?  A ridiculous assertion! This portion of our history only provides MORE proof of our bigoted, backward closed mindedness.

The election of Obama will not change this, but highlight it.

Report this

By Leisure Suit Larry, October 23, 2008 at 3:28 pm Link to this comment
(Unregistered commenter)

“So you miss using Wright and Rezko, real problems for you and your soundbite world,”

My soundbite world.. That’s a laugh… I won’t go into it…


Rezco is a problem for me because I lived in slums like his for many years. People who chum with slum lords probably won’t get my vote, not soundbite, real smell, taste, and lead paint.

Wright is a problem for me because no one seems to see the connection to racism, because racism can never be “reverse” it has to be Whites hating blacks, it can never be blacks hating whites.

I understand Rev. Wright. In his small world, his line gets the collection plates filled.  HOWEVER he is just the opposite side of the John Birch Society coin… and Obama stayed in his church for 20 years.

Report this
Anarcissie's avatar

By Anarcissie, October 23, 2008 at 2:18 pm Link to this comment

Racism is a theory about racial superiority.  Stating that someone got a break because of racial identity is not in itself racism, regardless of whether it is provable or reasonable.

Report this
Leefeller's avatar

By Leefeller, October 23, 2008 at 9:53 am Link to this comment

LSL,

You comments do seem to smack of bigotry, only because you did not include Ayres and acorn and all the bull pucky the McCain Palin phone sucking crew have been sending out. The only thing missing is burning crosses and separate drinking fountains. 

So you miss using Wright and Rezko, real problems for you and your soundbite world, and then you say you are sorry?

Surprised you did not say terrorist and pedicure and anything else you could conjure up. 

Your choice of words makes you seem the bigot. 

“We haven’t “transended race, we’re so deathly afraid of it that we ignore Rezko, Wright, and the funding from the same energy companies BO tells us he will regulate.

Report this
Tony Wicher's avatar

By Tony Wicher, October 23, 2008 at 9:17 am Link to this comment

By cyrena, October 22 at 11:34 pm #


Tony Wicher responds to Leisure Suit Larry

• “..Sorry, LSL, but you sound like one racist SOB to me…”

You got that right Tony!!!

Here’s the biggest clue that NOBODY can miss, (except of course for the racist ignorants themselves)

From Leisure Suit Larry

• “…Bullshit! ….Obama would still be a first term Senator were he white…”
Now there have certainly been other ‘clues’ to LSL’s racism and ignorance, but this is the biggest giveaway of all.

There are things I’d just love to tell the racist SOB, but I’m gonna follow Obama’s example, and bite my tongue.
————————————————————————-
cyrena,

I’ll just add that when you hear somebody take the KKK-Nazi line that blacks have special privileges in America and are taking honest hard-working white folks’ jobs (no doubt aided and abetted by sneaky Jews in high places) you know what you’re dealing with.

Report this

By Folktruther, October 23, 2008 at 9:08 am Link to this comment

Leisure suit Larry has said nothing to indicate that he is racist.  He is merely being ganged up on by the Las Vegas duo because he rejects the absurdities they pour on the Dems.  Don’t be intimidated, Larry!  And try not to laugh when Tony Wicher says the Dems are socialists.

Report this
Anarcissie's avatar

By Anarcissie, October 23, 2008 at 8:24 am Link to this comment

Joeseph Schmoltz: ’... The “Africa cradle of humanity” theory is very PC but only possiblly correct.’

It’s not PC.  It’s what the evidence shows.  The scientific evidence, that is.

Report this

By Leisure Suit Larry, October 23, 2008 at 6:00 am Link to this comment
(Unregistered commenter)

By Tony Wicher, October 22 at 11:15 pm #

Sorry, LSL, but you sound like one racist SOB to me.

First of all, you are a liar. You are not “sorry” (using your meaning of the word.) But it sure is “sorry” (my meaning) to insult my mother whom, I assume, you do not know.

Name me one first term Senator elected to the presidency in the last 100 years.

Now tell me what Obama has which qualifies him to be president, Mc Cain has 24 years in the Senate which hardly “qualifies” him, so what has Obama got which is so special? I mean other than the gift of gab.

The “racist” epithet is just a silencer and I’m not sorry it won’t “silence” me!

“racist” is believing that skin color or ethnic background obsolves SOME folks from rotten self-serving behavior. I share that belief with other “racists” like Whoopie Goldberg and Bill Cosby.

I understand that some folks believe this election should be about burying this country’s ugly racist heritage. some folks believe we’ll all be one big happy family if we elect a black man…and any black man will do.

I do not share that belief.

Report this

By cyrena, October 23, 2008 at 1:49 am Link to this comment

Fenwick,

You should join us in Las Vegas. I’m planning to play just one hand of blackjack at a casino, and win enough for my pre-owned mobile home and a new laptop. Enough dog food for a year would be like a bonus.

That way, we can volunteer our services there in DC, just to help Obama get the new admin kicked off, (ya know, the grunt work that SOMEBODY always has to do) and then we can cruise on back to the West Coast and settle into the new paradigm.

Report this

By cyrena, October 23, 2008 at 12:34 am Link to this comment

Tony Wicher responds to Leisure Suit Larry

•  “..Sorry, LSL, but you sound like one racist SOB to me…”

You got that right Tony!!!

Here’s the biggest clue that NOBODY can miss, (except of course for the racist ignorants themselves)

From Leisure Suit Larry

•  “…Bullshit! ….Obama would still be a first term Senator were he white…”
Now there have certainly been other ‘clues’ to LSL’s racism and ignorance, but this is the biggest giveaway of all.

There are things I’d just love to tell the racist SOB, but I’m gonna follow Obama’s example, and bite my tongue.

Besides, Leefeller always gives me something to smile about. Thanks for the verification Leefeller. You know *I* knew what you were saying, but ya can’t blame folks for being a little bit on edge these days. wink

Meantime, I wanna know how *you* got one of those special stickers that says “I voted”, when you voted absentee. (like I always do). I thought you only got those special things for showing up in person. So, how do you rate?

I think I should have gotten one of those with my mail-in ballot, so I could put it on, and wear it through to the Inauguration. (which just happens to happen on my birthday).

Maybe I’ll put that in the suggestion box. (or, were you just pulling my leg about your sticker?) smile

Report this
Tony Wicher's avatar

By Tony Wicher, October 23, 2008 at 12:20 am Link to this comment

By FENWICK, October 22 at 10:09 am #


Tony,

When you get that job in the Obama administration, drop us a post now and then.
——————————————————————————-
FENWICK,

Well, at least I’m going to Vegas on Friday with Cyrena and friends to canvass for Obama and hear him in person when he makes his first appearance there on Saturday after getting back from visiting his grandmother. Nobody is paying us, though. We just believe in Obama like millions of other volunteers. 
But I’ll let you know how fun it was. Wish you were there!

Report this
Tony Wicher's avatar

By Tony Wicher, October 23, 2008 at 12:15 am Link to this comment

By Leisure Suit Larry, October 22 at 1:41 pm #
(Unregistered commenter)

TW says:

“We can be proud of having transcended racial prejudice and having chosen by far the best candidate for the job regardless of race.”

Bullshit!

Obama would still be a first term Senator were he white.

We haven’t “transended race, we’re so deathly afraid of it that we ignore Rezko, Wright, and the funding from the same energy companies BO tells us he will regulate.

Sorry Tony, I believed the Democrats in ‘06… they lied just like Republicans, Fool me once shame on you, fool me twice shame on me.
====================================================
Sorry, LSL, but you sound like one racist SOB to me.

Report this

By Leisure Suit Larry, October 22, 2008 at 2:41 pm Link to this comment
(Unregistered commenter)

TW says:

“We can be proud of having transcended racial prejudice and having chosen by far the best candidate for the job regardless of race.”


Bullshit!

Obama would still be a first term Senator were he white.

We haven’t “transended race, we’re so deathly afraid of it that we ignore Rezko, Wright, and the funding from the same energy companies BO tells us he will regulate.

Sorry Tony, I believed the Democrats in ‘06… they lied just like Republicans, Fool me once shame on you, fool me twice shame on me.

Report this
Tony Wicher's avatar

By Tony Wicher, October 22, 2008 at 10:39 am Link to this comment

McCain and the Republicans accuse Obama of engaging in “class warfare” by raising taxes on the rich and giving the non-rich a tax cut. Republicans are right about that. What they don’t say, of course, is that by opposing this, and in fact by giving the rich even more tax cuts, they are ALSO engaging in class warfare, on the side of the rich. Progressives understand this, but the Republicans hope the American people as a whole won’t.

Report this
Tony Wicher's avatar

By Tony Wicher, October 22, 2008 at 10:13 am Link to this comment

This election is class warfare! That’s what McCain calls it. He’s right. He calls Obama a “socialist”. Right again! Obama IS a socialist, relative to McCain. So, be on the right side. Vote Obama.

Obama does want to tax private wealth for the benefit of the country as a whole. He is actually supported in this by rich people like Warren Buffet who have said that they don’t pay enough taxes and that this is having a bad effect on the economy. Buffet understands better than anybody that unlimited private greed leads to economic collapse. Therefore he has joined together with an advocate for the poor and middle class, Obama, because he is far-sighted and intelligent enough to understand that in the long run rich and poor have common interests and class warfare benefits nobody.

Report this
Tony Wicher's avatar

By Tony Wicher, October 22, 2008 at 9:51 am Link to this comment

By Leefeller, October 22 at 7:10 am #

Liberal agenda has been demonized so effectively by the corporate and elite interests since the 1920’s, if you believe Nader can change ignorance by logic so be it.
——————————————————————————
Actually, Nader has joined with corporate and elite interests in demonizing liberalism. That’s why Republicans love him so mucch.

Report this
Tony Wicher's avatar

By Tony Wicher, October 22, 2008 at 9:45 am Link to this comment

Re LSL
Since all candidates are on the greed side, the poor will never get representation under our system.
——————————————————————————
LSL,

Obama wants to raise taxes on the rich to pay for social programs such as universal medical care, rebuilding of infrastructure, education and energy independence which will benfit the whole country. He understands that the economy cannot function if people are so poor they cannot buy the products of their own labor, and his policies are directed toward helping the poor and the middle class. McCain wants to lower taxes on corporations and the rich and to hell with the middle class and the poor. If you can’t see the difference, you need a political seeing-eye dog.

Report this
Tony Wicher's avatar

By Tony Wicher, October 22, 2008 at 9:30 am Link to this comment

By Anarcissie, October 22 at 4:21 am #

One person voting for Nader does nothing.
——————————————————————————
Anarcissie,

It’s one less vote for Obama, and more than that if you succeed in convincing anybody else that their vote means nothing and they might as well make some stupid “statement”.

“Every little bit helps”, said the little old lady who peed in the sea.

Report this
Tony Wicher's avatar

By Tony Wicher, October 22, 2008 at 9:26 am Link to this comment

By Leefeller, October 21 at 6:10 pm #


Verifying here!

Yes I did vote and I voted for Obama.  With voter suppression and the extensive bickers we have endured on TD, I was making a subtle tongue in cheek comment about voting for a third party candidate, my brother in law the plumber, which makes about as much sense as voting for Alfred E Newman, the Wizard of Oz or Nader.
——————————————————————————-Thanks, Leefeller. Good job pulling my leg!

Report this
Tony Wicher's avatar

By Tony Wicher, October 22, 2008 at 9:20 am Link to this comment

By Leisure Suit Larry, October 21 at 6:02 am #

Actually were we a thoughtful people, black and white would have nothing to do with our choice in November, The choice would be one of poverty vs greed… Since all candidates are on the greed side, the poor will never get representation under our system.
————————————————————————-
LSL,

If Americans were a thoughtful, socially enlightened people, race would obviously not be an issue. Fenwick is right too when he says the concept of race has no scientific basis. It is subjective, a meme if you will, a stereotype, an image, with no real existence outside the mind. BUT, it sure has an extremely important subjective existence in the minds of people, both conscious and unconscious. It is a milestone of social progress for a black man to be elected president of a white country for the first time in history. We white folks deserve a lot of credit for this. We can be proud of having transcended racial prejudice and having chosen by far the best candidate for the job regardless of race. We have proven that we are a thoughtful, enlightened people. Not only can we be proud of ourselves, the world will look up to us too.

Report this
Leefeller's avatar

By Leefeller, October 22, 2008 at 8:10 am Link to this comment

Outraged,

Eight years of the Bush experience is what I speak of, add Nader to voter suppression and we may have eight more of Bush/McCain/palin government. Just, the way I see it.

Most Americans are ignorant, they will vote against their own best interests time and time again,  with simplistic prodding from the Propaganda machine. Nader is way to liberal, seen as a pinko/socialist by most.  Just look around you, masses of morons, talking or even contemplating voting for McCain, should be a wake up call of some sort? 

Liberal agenda has been demonized so effectively by the corporate and elite interests since the 1920’s, if you believe Nader can change ignorance by logic so be it.

Report this

By Joeseph Schmoltz, October 22, 2008 at 6:18 am Link to this comment
(Unregistered commenter)

Not necessarily;

The new thought coming from archeological study is

1.) People may have evolved simultaneously on different continents.

2.) That the Neandertal & Cro-magnon may not be related to all humans.

3.) That all life may evolve from “seeds” spread across the galaxy, and fertilized only here.

The “Africa cradle of humanity” theory is very PC but only possiblly correct.

Report this
Anarcissie's avatar

By Anarcissie, October 22, 2008 at 5:21 am Link to this comment

’... If voter suppression can make Obama Loose, what do you believe voting for Nader does?

One person voting for Nader does nothing.  Suppressing many thousands of votes might actually change the outcome of elections—it’s a very long shot, but no longer out of the realm of practical possibility.

Report this
Outraged's avatar

By Outraged, October 22, 2008 at 12:13 am Link to this comment

Re: Shenonymous

Your comment: “Outraged - so they say.  Most likely we are all of prehistoric African heritage!

LOL… sure, and if you want to “go one better than that”.... possibly/probably…we are ALL Pangaeans ...from the continent of PANGAEA!  Yo…we be good.

Report this
Outraged's avatar

By Outraged, October 21, 2008 at 10:16 pm Link to this comment

Re: Lefeller

Your comment:  “When people do not learn from experience, they should vote for Nader and say it was Obama’s fault, makes sense to me? Another option may be they were really for McCain in the first place.

I’m curious….what “experience” might you be speaking of?  Also, are you claiming that a vote for Nader is a vote for McCain?  If so, why?

Report this
Outraged's avatar

By Outraged, October 21, 2008 at 7:27 pm Link to this comment

Re: cyrena

Your comment: “You have consistently ignored your OWN responsibility as a citizen, and you’ve willfully ignored it everytime I’ve tried to explain parliamentary procedures to you, and how they work. (Because of course you know)

Qualify your comment.  How is it you feel I have consistently ignored my responsibilty as a citizen? Do you have one shred of evidence ...?  Again, you are resorting to inuendo and personal attack, in an effort direct attention away from your actions.  Which was invoking race in an underhanded way.

You: “If you’ve mentioned once, you’ve mentioned a million times, how much OBAMA is responsible for the FISA vote. And the same with everything else that you can dig up about his ‘record’ and always out of context

Me: Again, what I’ve said is OBAMA IS RESPONSIBLE FOR HIS VOTE ON FISA.  Against tremendous public outrage and numerous requests to vote “NO” DIRECTED PERSONALLY TO HIM,as a presidential candidate, he did whatever he wanted which was against the will of the people.

You: “it was pretty pointless to lobby HIM, when your OWN representatives had an equal vote in the thing.

Me: How MY representatives vote HAS NO BEARING on Obama’s vote.  The requests went out to Obama AS A PRESIDENTIAL CANDIDATE, which I’m certain were ten-fold of what any other representative received.

You: “So, please don’t feel like you’re ‘special’. I do that with anyone who consistently talks a lot of shit about what ‘the other’ is doing or failing to do. My rather consistent advice, is “Don’t worry about what HE/SHE/IT is doing or saying, but rather concern yourself with what YOU are doing or saying.

Me:  Good advice, you should USE IT.  Your words, “you never did tell me how YOUR Congress people and YOUR Senators voted on the FISA legislation, so I decided to look it up myself.”  My response, was “Aside from your ”paranoid schizo labeling”, what would be your PREMISE for even CONSIDERING such an exercise…?  Are you “checking up on me”, is my perspective “not worthy” unless YOU SO DEEM IT SO!  Have you lost all sense of moral compass?

Circular….definitely circular.

Report this
Leefeller's avatar

By Leefeller, October 21, 2008 at 7:10 pm Link to this comment

Verifying here!

Yes I did vote and I voted for Obama.  With voter suppression and the extensive bickers we have endured on TD, I was making a subtle tongue in cheek comment about voting for a third party candidate, my brother in law the plumber, which makes about as much sense as voting for Alfred E Newman, the Wizard of Oz or Nader.

For some unexplained reason I really do not want to see McCain/Palin in the Whitehouse, so my brother in law may even loose by a higher number than Nader. 

When people do not learn from experience, they should vote for Nader and say it was Obama’s fault, makes sense to me? Another option may be they were really for McCain in the first place. 

The Republicans are instituting Voter suppression big time.  Colorado is one state which reeks of partisan meddling, purging votes for many different reasons.  A new article in “Rolling Stone” addresses voter suppression, but I believe it is not available on the open web yet, may not be available before elections.  Keep your eyes peeled or maybe TD could address the issue of voter suppression.

If voter suppression can make Obama Loose, what do you believe voting for Nader does?

Report this
Shenonymous's avatar

By Shenonymous, October 21, 2008 at 5:39 pm Link to this comment

Outraged - so they say.  Most likely we are all of prehistoric African heritage!

Report this

By cyrena, October 21, 2008 at 12:23 pm Link to this comment

Outraged…

Aside from your ”paranoid schizo labeling, what would be your PREMISE for even CONSIDERING such an exercise…?  Are you “checking up on me”, is my perspective “not worthy” unless YOU SO DEEM IT SO!  Have you lost all sense of moral compass?

~~~~

I’m so disappointed in my own decision to waste time with any comments to/from you, because I see that you’ve just consistently devolved into what I can only interpret as parnoid schizoid tendencies.

CHECKING UP ON YOU???? Please…is that not pretty arrogant?

No, I made my point in the very first sentence, and it’s consistent with what I’ve been saying for months. You have consistently ignored your OWN responsibility as a citizen, and you’ve willfully ignored it everytime I’ve tried to explain parliamentary procedures to you, and how they work. (Because of course you know)

If you’ve mentioned once, you’ve mentioned a million times, how much OBAMA is responsible for the FISA vote. And the same with everything else that you can dig up about his ‘record’ and always out of context.

And so I’ve AKSED you…REPEATEDLY, how your OWN representatives voted…making the point, (that you’d easily see if you weren’t willfully ignoring it) that Obama was not alone in that decision, or any other. I was making that point that in all the ‘lobbying’ of Obama (the letters, etc, etc that you’ve mentioned yourself) that happened prior to that vote, it was pretty pointless to lobby HIM, when your OWN representatives had an equal vote in the thing.

Checking up on you? Hardly. I was challenging you, and calling you out on your hypocricy. The suggestion that I was ‘checking up’ on you suggests either an extreme arrogance or paranoia. Maybe both.

We’ve all been under a whole bunch of stress these past 8 years or more. Some people handle it with denial and avoidance, and others prefer to just deal with the mechansim as it is. I’m of the latter. So, please don’t feel like you’re ‘special’. I do that with anyone who consistently talks a lot of shit about what ‘the other’ is doing or failing to do. My rather consistent advice, is “Don’t worry about what HE/SHE/IT is doing or saying, but rather concern yourself with what YOU are doing or saying.

So, did you ever speak to any of your own representatives about any of the votes or legislation that you think Obama jacked up? Nevermind, that is clearly a rhetorical question at this point. I don’t expect an answer.

Tony, on this…

Leefeller,

I am sorry that you threw away your vote. To me it’s like you threw democracy itself in the garbage.

~~

I think Leefeller is pulling your leg. wink

Maybe he could verify if you really wanna know, but that’s kinda what I’m thinking since he said he wrote-in his brother-in-law the plumber. He also said GO Obama!

(So, maybe Obama is also a plumber and we didn’t know it, and maybe he’s Leefeller’s brother-in-law as well) wink

Report this
Outraged's avatar

By Outraged, October 21, 2008 at 11:43 am Link to this comment

Re: Shenonymous

Exactly.  Aren’t we all Americans with differing ethnic heritages..?  And if we go back far enough, aren’t we all of African descent!

Report this
Outraged's avatar

By Outraged, October 21, 2008 at 11:38 am Link to this comment

Re: cyrena

Your comment: “Is THAT what you meant Outaged? Aren’t THOSE the ‘repercussion’s’ that you were referring to? And aren’t YOU in effect saying to me, “Now why did you have to go and TELL everybody he wasn’t WHITE??” Why did you have to let the TRUTH out, to the IGNORANT racists who might not vote for him now?

No…those aren’t the repercussions I was referring to.  The repercussions I was referring to was the fact that you invoked the ISSUE of race or ethnicity, thereby qualifying the woman’s comment.

From the many months you and I have been commenting here, and the spinmeister you can be if you so choose, I feel you knew that the mere INVOKING of ethnicity in any way can start off a firestorm of racial attacks, verbal or otherwise.

We were both here arguing the issue of race during the primaries.  We both saw and have experienced in our own lives the repercussions that invoking race AT ALL can incite, even outside of the context were it is voiced.

My feeling is YOU know this, I know I know this, and that is the reason I found your comment so unsettling.  I’m not concerned about Nader’s ethnicity or Obama’s…. I would never vote for or against a candidate simply because of their ethnicity.  Yes, I understand others would…but that’s not really an issue to me.

My concern is the fact the when you INVOKED race, it was an attempt to MAKE race make a difference to those who “might want to know” that Nader is an Arab-American, which in itself is just plain dangerous, however you used it as an underhanded way of invoking race/ethnicity by claiming not too.  Given my feeling that you are well aware of what can ensue because of this type of rhetoric, I found it unsettling and just plain sad.  I still do.

Report this
Tony Wicher's avatar

By Tony Wicher, October 21, 2008 at 8:30 am Link to this comment

By Leefeller, October 20 at 3:31 pm #


Well, I just voted and have the little sticker on my sweat shirt to prove it.  Just love absentee ballots. You know, with all the bickering going on, I finally decided to vote for a third party candidate.

Go Obama!
——————————————————————————
Leefeller,

I am sorry that you threw away your vote. To me it’s like you threw democracy itself in the garbage.

Report this

By Leisure Suit Larry, October 21, 2008 at 7:02 am Link to this comment
(Unregistered commenter)

By Tony Wicher, October 19 at 2:01 pm

“Note the way you carefully clip off the rest of my sentence, which was “He is also black AND I DON’T THINK HE HAS FORGOTTEN IT”.

Yes I didn’t paste the entire quote, BUT I did address it.  I said:

“So is Clarence Thomas, Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice and JC Watts of Oklahoma. Bobby Jindel is Indian,but in hispart of the State he could pass for “black, and I’ll wager none of these folks forgets for one day that they are minority. To suggest otherwise is to engage in a racism akin to that to Lester Maddox, or Louise Day Hicks ...”

The Oreo analogy is stale and over used, but A case can be made that Obama, growing up in Hawaii, and Indoniesia may have missed some of the racism so prevelant in US public schools. The divide between folks like Lewis, Norton, Jackson, / vs \ Obama is a chasm of hate filled bigotry fueled by the likes of Bull Connor, Ross R. Barnett George Wallace, John Patterson, Orval Faubus and a host of others whom Obama knows only from his hitory class. Places like Birmingham, Little Rock, Selma, Greensboro, South Boston and Rosewood have only an intelectual meaning for Obama and since none of his family were ever brought to America in chains, his idea of slavery is akin to a sympathetic white man. To get the true flavor of where our racism originated one must do more than go to a museum or read books.

Actually were we a thoughtful people, black and white would have nothing to do with our choice in November, The choice would be one of poverty vs greed… Since all candidates are on the greed side, the poor will never get representation under our system.

Taking 100 million dollars in one month from the poor and middle class and giving most of it to the madison ave folks who “create” the Obama we get to see is not a progressive action.

Report this
Shenonymous's avatar

By Shenonymous, October 21, 2008 at 12:56 am Link to this comment

While it well-known that I am not a Nader supporter and think the guy has delusions of presidential grandeur, I feel the need since the trooth is being bandied about to mention that he is an American born in Connecticut of Lebanese parents who were Catholics.  So the truth is that he is not an Arab at all although the claim is that he is.  He is Arab American in the same way that I am Italian American which is a designation about cultural ancestry and not national identity. 

Republican John Sununu, New Hampshire Senator has Lebanese, Irish, and Scottish ancestry and those facts do not make him an Arab but he is considered by some to be Arab American and is so listed in Wikipedia as among notable Arab Americans.  This is ridiculous since he could also equally be considered Irish American or Scottish American.  One more example, the fact that black Americans are often called African Americans (a designation often found in the dialogue of Jessie Jackson) does not make them African.

The discussion of Nader’s ethnicity is absolutely absurd and irrelevant to his viability to be president.  While some of his economic ideas are excellent and I think ought to be listened to, he is not attractive as a candidate for that office by a large enough constituency to be successfully elected.  This brings us to the latest absurdity of calling Barack Obama a Muslim.  The truth is that Obama is a Christian, much to my atheist dismay, but the facts are the facts and I have to live with them.  The last truth is that the word Muslim has about as much negativity associated with it as does Christian or Jew or Hindu, or FSMian.

Vote Obama/Biden

Report this

By cyrena, October 21, 2008 at 12:16 am Link to this comment

Indeed outraged, I DID know what I was ‘saying’ (not DOING) and it was to point to the ignorance at the foundation of racism.

Let’s go back to this, and then I’m done with it, but it’s the same calling out that I did with you, far more diplomatically at first.

I made the comment, exposing the ignorance behind a woman who claimed she was worried about Obama being an Arab, because he might ‘blow something up.’ When I pointed to the fact that this woman (in her racist ignorance - and there are millions like her) would support an actual Arab, while accusing the black guy to be the one who would ‘blow things up’ because he was an Arab, my point was very clear to anyone who wasn’t influenced by much of the same thinking.

YOUR response was to say that *I* was making a racist comment. HELLO? Is the FACT that Obama is (based on how he LOOKS) a black man, and the FACT that Nader is a Arab, (but doesn’t ‘look’ like it, because if you wanna get really ‘technical’ about it, people of Middle Eastern descent are put in the ‘white’ category) somehow ‘racist’? I don’t see that being a ‘racist’ comment at all.

YOU interpreted it that way…BECAUSE??? Well, YOU TELL ME! And then you further accused me of ‘repercussions’ that you claim I knew this
T-R-U-T-H would create.

So, let’s break this down Outraged, because I don’t *DO* innuendo. I do TRUTH..and when people like you just keep coming back for more, (because you don’t get it the first time) you’ll get it without any cream or sugar.

YOU automatically interpreted this to be racist comment on MY part, (this very simple TRUTH), and it got you all upset, because YOU know how the ignorant racists would react!!

Oh my says the ignornat racist that was gonna vote for Nader, “I didn’t know he was an ARAB!”

Is THAT what you meant Outaged? Aren’t THOSE the ‘repercussion’s’ that you were referring to? And aren’t YOU in effect saying to me, “Now why did you have to go and TELL everybody he wasn’t WHITE??” Why did you have to let the TRUTH out, to the IGNORANT racists who might not vote for him now?

Isn’t THAT what you’re really concerned about Outraged? I think it is, and THAT’S what’s sad. No…it’s beyond sad. It’s about as dishonest and hypocritical as it gets.

It was dishonest and hypocritical when I recognized it in parts of my own family from 50 years ago till now…the whole ‘Passe le blanc” syndrome. (pass for white if you can, don’t let them know you’re black) And, it’s equally digusting now. It just keeps feeding the ignorance. So, while it doesn’t make YOU a racist, it damn sure makes you anxious to play into the same sick game.

THAT’S sad!! And THAT’S the truth!!

Report this
Outraged's avatar

By Outraged, October 20, 2008 at 11:08 pm Link to this comment

Re: cyrena

I forgot to address this portion of your comment, sorry.  But I do think this bears addressing.

Your comment: “Why is this ‘creepy’ Outraged, unless you’re a paranoid schizo”? This particular comment goes to a huge part of my argument with you and the Naderites and all of the rest of you who don’t get what your OWN parts are in this exercise of democracy.

Aside from your “paranoid schizo labeling, what would be your PREMISE for even CONSIDERING such an exercise…?  Are you “checking up on me”, is my perspective “not worthy” unless YOU SO DEEM IT SO!  Have you lost all sense of moral compass?

There you go with the “Naderite” supposed inflammatory rhetoric.  I will vote for Nader.  Get over it.  Nader shoots Obama’s rhetoric all to hell.  If you have an issue with Nader v Obama, take that up with Obama.  Nader is not the “lacking” candidate here, Obama is because he has been bought and paid for, and that is also sad.

It is creepy, because according to you… you are “checking up on me”.  As if you could, and if you actually can, and you’re using it, EVEN more creepy.  Now… if you’re just spouting garbage, then whatever.  Talk about fascist dictator philosophies….my god.

Report this
Outraged's avatar

By Outraged, October 20, 2008 at 8:50 pm Link to this comment

Re: cyrena

Aside from all your inuendos and false statements, I’ll address this comment.

But then, this race thing really only matters to ignorants and racists. Since Obama is clearly the most qualified of all the candidates that have offered themselves up for the position, it wouldn’t matter to me what color/race/ethnicity/religion he or any of the rest of them happened to be. But then I’m not racist or ignorant.

I do not feel Obama is “clearly the most qualified of all the candidates”.  I know you are not racist, which is why your comment was so unsettling and inexcusable.  Had I thought you were racist, I would have “cut you some slack” if for no other reason than ignorance.  But you knew what you were doing, and that is sad.

Report this
Leefeller's avatar

By Leefeller, October 20, 2008 at 4:31 pm Link to this comment

Well, I just voted and have the little sticker on my sweat shirt to prove it.  Just love absentee ballots. You know, with all the bickering going on, I finally decided to vote for a third party candidate. You guys really got me thinking and what the hell. You know it really is getting old voting for the best of the worst and all that. So you know the write in candidate of my choice is my Brother in Law, because he is a plumber and cheats on his taxes every year.  Every time the Pope comes to town, they go out pay their respects or whatever they do. My brother in law says Obama was not born in the USA and is a Moslem, but I just realized I should have wrote in Alfred E Newman, because “What Me Worry” seems to have worked for the last eight year, but didn’t we vote him in last time?

Go Obama!

Report this

By leilah, October 20, 2008 at 4:08 pm Link to this comment

There seems to be an amount of talking past each other or talking at cross purposes.  One of the most important things in this election, I think, is making sure the Republicans don’t steal it again. Try to guarantee a large showing.  I heard phone cameras are going to be used to make sure anything eerily Rove-like will be recorded.  I was for Kucinich, then I got realistic and supported Hilary, but now I am supporting Obama.

Report this

By cyrena, October 20, 2008 at 3:49 pm Link to this comment

Outraged quotes me here.

•  “you never did tell me how YOUR Congress people and YOUR Senators voted on the FISA legislation, so I decided to look it up myself.” (this is just creepy)

Why is this ‘creepy’ Outraged, unless you’re a paranoid schizo? This particular comment goes to a huge part of my argument with you and the Naderites and all of the rest of you who don’t get what your OWN parts are in this exercise of democracy.

You have consistently, repeatedly, and in nearly every single post you’ve written of the past few months, referenced what Obama did or did not do in the Congress. And I have consistently asked you what YOU have done, to sway your OWN representatives in the House and in the Senate, to vote on behalf of YOUR interests.

And, each and every single time, you AVOID that very fundamental concept of how this particular ‘democracy’ works. So, I can keep saying it, because it doesn’t change. The STRUCTURE of this system DOES NOT CHANGE, at least not until the people decide that it will.

And that’s why we can keep going back to the same example, over and over again, until you either get it, or you don’t. But while *you* may continue to refuse to ‘get it’ other’s surely will, and at the end of the day, at least some may gain from that understanding.

It’s also fundamental to the understanding of how much a president or any other single member of the political body can or cannot do, and how it works. Your mindset is that a president is all powerful. That is incorrect. Your comments suggest that as a Senator, Barack Obama could have made the FISA, (or any other legislation) pass or fail. That is not real. As a House or Senate representative, all of these 535 people can only lobby their equals to pass legislation that is, (at least theoretically), in the interests of their own constituents. And, it’s up to their constituents, (that would be you and I) to make our wishes known.

YOU don’t live in Illinois, and neither do I. So when the FISA thing came up for a vote, (for about the 3rd or 4th time) it was up to you to call on your OWN reps to ‘do the right thing’. I did, and my own Senator (Barbara Boxer) voted nay on the thing. Our other Senator, Mrs. Feinstein, voted yes. Now that isn’t the first time that Mrs. Feinstein has made what I considered to be a poor judgment vote. (she also voted to confirm Muckasey as AG, even after he couldn’t/wouldn’t say that waterboarding is torture, and a violation of international law).

And, you and Chris Hedges ARE cherry picking idealists. Chris isn’t writing anything here that hasn’t already happened, and that a whole bunch of us didn’t see coming. Yeah, he saw it in Yugoslavia, and we saw it in Uruguay, and we saw it in Chile, and we saw it in Peru, and we saw it in a whole bunch of other countries that were, at some point in time, versions of open societies that fell to fascism or some other form of Authoritarianism, USUALLY in conjunction with economic meltdowns.

So Chris is several years late and several trillion dollars short, in pointing this out now. And guess what else? It AIN’T about Barack Obama!! He didn’t *cause* it, anymore than you or I did, and he cannot, (as senator or president) fix it, anymore than you or I can, as a single entity. I’m sorry if you find that ‘venomous’ but it happens to be the reality.

Report this

Page 1 of 4 pages  1 2 3 >  Last »

 
Right 1, Site wide - BlogAds Premium
 
Right 2, Site wide - Blogads
 
Join the Liberal Blog Advertising Network
 
 
 
Right Skyscraper, Site Wide
 
Join the Liberal Blog Advertising Network
 

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