RSN June 14 Fundraising
FB Share
Email This Page
add comment
Print

Ash writes: "It is difficult to know if Mitt Romney's bald face lying is intended to convince voters or himself, or is simply symptomatic of some pathological disorder."

President Barack Obama attends the memorial service in Tucson, Arizona for victims of the shooting there. 01/12/11. (photo: Getty Images)
President Barack Obama attends the memorial service in Tucson, Arizona for victims of the shooting there. 01/12/11. (photo: Getty Images)


Obama Is the Wiser Path

By Marc Ash, Reader Supported News

01 November 12

Reader Supported News | Perspective

 

hat died along with Jack Kennedy on November 22, 1963, was the notion that a popularly-elected leader could effect change from the Oval Office. The remains of that day were an understanding that attempting to challenge the power structure could have consequences even for the president.

Barack Obama brings deep flaws to his perspective of the presidency. The administration's ongoing campaign of extra-judicial assassination, a cold shoulder to the systemic oppression of civil liberties, a Justice Department that stands blind and mute as corporate corruption devours the soul of the nation, an indifference to environmental suicide that borders on contempt. It's all there. Yet, somehow there is a crucial glimmer of understanding in him that will not allow hope to be extinguished.

It is difficult to know if Mitt Romney's bald-face lying is intended to convince voters or himself, or is simply symptomatic of some pathological disorder. When he says that he wants to be president without releasing his tax returns or information about his Cayman Islands bank accounts, what he is really saying is that he views the Oval Office as an acquisition, a commodity to be bought and sold to the highest bidder - at a profit of course.

What we learned in the Occupy encampments is that change does not come from the top, it comes from the bottom. The struggle to reestablish American democracy has only just begun. It's not likely that a leader of the American Pro-Democracy Movement will occupy the Oval Office any time soon. But Obama is by orders of magnitude more likely to recognize and respect change when confronted with it than Romney would ever be.

He is not the progressive lion we dreamed he would be, but he still stands. We must construct a strategy for grass-roots change around the better man. Barack Obama is clearly that.



Marc Ash was formerly the founder and Executive Director of Truthout, and is now founder and Editor of Reader Supported News.

Reader Supported News is the Publication of Origin for this work. Permission to republish is freely granted with credit and a link back to Reader Supported News.

 

Comments   

We are concerned about a recent drift towards vitriol in the RSN Reader comments section. There is a fine line between moderation and censorship. No one likes a harsh or confrontational forum atmosphere. At the same time everyone wants to be able to express themselves freely. We'll start by encouraging good judgment. If that doesn't work we'll have to ramp up the moderation.

General guidelines: Avoid personal attacks on other forum members; Avoid remarks that are ethnically derogatory; Do not advocate violence, or any illegal activity.

Remember that making the world better begins with responsible action.

- The RSN Team

 
+81 # Kayjay 2012-11-01 17:47
Yes President Obama has made blunders in his first term. He has not affected the change we all envisioned. He has the faults, biases, and ego of a career politician. He is not a savior as some of us hoped. But we need to voted for him again and subsequently get him to pursue oft promised change. Some may need to hold their nose while pulling the lever for Barak.... that's fine, I will supply the clothes pins! But we must keep that Rat Mittens from getting his mitts all over the White House. This election scares me..... Sandy may have been the October surprise. But I fear what Rove may wrought. And I would really like to see a follow up to news I hearrd through the grapevine, that the Romney family has ownership connections to vote tallying equipment in OHIO! Talk about a conflict of interest. If true.....Romney has NO business being on the ballot in that state. If someone knows more about this....make a stink. Vote Obama to snub Mittens.
 
 
+74 # WestWinds 2012-11-01 20:13
If Robmey has family connections to the ownership of the vote tallying equipment in Ohio, then Eric Holder has a duty to the nation to be all over this. Enough is enough. I think this nation is just about reaching the end of its tether where this rampant corruption is concerned.
 
 
-18 # aaheart 2012-11-01 23:37
If the election is again fraudulent as it has been for the past two decades, how will your vote stop Wilbur? We are faced with a two party illusion not very different from the Stalinist one party state. It's not the the voters who count, it's those who count the votes. We now have a Stalinist government under the facade of democracy. The Gulag already has people in indefinite detention and how would you know? Falling for the weak vote Obama to snub Wilbur is as weak an excuse for voting as it is possible to achieve.
 
 
+21 # Sacrebleu! 2012-11-02 06:04
When you don't know where you are driving to you still hold the steering wheel.
This is the same here: you may not be sure where to go on politics but if you don't vote you'll visit the ditch.
 
 
-15 # aaheart 2012-11-02 11:22
Very poor analogy...votin g and paying taxes are measures used by the elite to determine degree of compliance of the sheeple to know if it is an optimum moment to steer them into the FEMA corral.

Google exact title: Silent Weapons for Quiet Wars - the Central Control of the New World Order
 
 
+1 # EternalTruth 2012-11-03 23:05
Good read. " A good and easily quantified indicator of harvest time is the number of public citizens who pay income tax despite an obvious lack of reciprocal or honest service from the government." Awesome. I like this one too: "they pay taxes to finance a professional association of hit men collectively called politicians, and then complain about corruption in government."
I've got no idea if this document is legit, but it certainly describes with accuracy much that is going on in this country.
 
 
+25 # Rita Walpole Ague 2012-11-02 01:11
Yep, Kayjay, hold my nose I will, as I put in my vote for Oh Bomb Ah. Then, should he win (who the hell knows if any of our votes count or get honestly counted these days, including in such vote pretend states as Ohio, Florida, et. al.), I'll do what Michael Moore advises: vote for Obama, then push on him harder than hard to get out of either being scared off or bought off m.o..

Lots and lots of real McCoy change is soooo needed, in order to...UNDO THE COUP
 
 
+22 # genierae 2012-11-02 05:18
We would have a very different country now if the left hadn't turned on President Obama right after he took office. If they had stood with him, while at the same time putting serious and persistent pressure on him to move left, we would now see a much better situation. Instead, Obama was quickly deserted by progressives who turned up their collective noses at his efforts to work with Republicans, and all the responsibility for change was dumped on his shoulders alone. I can't remember ever having a perfect President, yet Obama is harshly criticized for the things he does wrong, while his many good accomplishments are damned with faint praise, or simply ignored. He is held to a much higher standard than that good old white boy, Bill Clinton, who did much to pave the way for Bush to destroy our economy yet gets a pass. I ask you progressives why this is so? I have my suspicions, but my mind is open. Please enlighten me.
 
 
-10 # engelbach 2012-11-02 08:01
I'll be glad to enlighten you.

The left did push Obama: by pushing him to not compromise with the GOP. It seems everyone but him saw clearly that the effort was futile. Had he acted decisively, with majorities in both houses and the bully pulpit, the GOP and the Tea Party might never had gained ascendancy.

Obama's decisions to sell out single payer healthcare and every other important policy without a fight were his, and his alone. His response to efforts from progressives to push him was to brand them "the professional left."

Hold your nose and vote for him if you like. But for heaven's sake put the blame for his failure where it belongs, not on the voters.

Labor Party 2016.
 
 
+8 # genierae 2012-11-02 14:56
I shouldn't even reply to people like you engelbach, you are not serious enough for a real discussion of the issues. Your unenlightening reply totally ignored everything I said, choosing instead to fall back on the old belly-aching subterfuge that I've been hearing for four years. You need to learn to think in a new way if you can manage to break your brain out of its very deep, very tiresome groove. I am very glad to vote for President Obama, and I look forward to four more years of progress if he gets re-elected. Unfortunately, voters such as yourself will definitely hurt his chances. This country has the highest number of selfish, know-nothing voters on earth, and they are a serious threat to the well-being of this democracy and its people. They are a drag on society, and get their kicks from obstructing every good idea that comes along. By the way, I live every day of my life for the sake of heaven, and I'll put the blame on voters if I choose because that's right where it belongs.

"Two things are infinite: The universe and human stupidity; and I'm not sure about the universe." Albert Einstein
 
 
-3 # engelbach 2012-11-03 04:48
Your personal attack on me does you no credit.

You don't address any of the issues Ash speaks of. You ignore the facts of what Obama actually did, which contradicts your assertion that the "left turned on him." You don't consider Obama's actual performance, including the number of innocent people who have died thanks to Obama's "surge" in Afghanistan.

I remind you that the electorate that you consider so stupid were smart enough to elect Obama in the first place, and they had a right to expect that he would fight for his promises.

In making lame excuses for Obama and blaming the very people who both offered him support and did put "persistent pressure on him to move left" you substitute your own revisionist history for actual events.
 
 
+5 # genierae 2012-11-03 08:59
It was not my intention to personally attack you, but when you defend irresponsible and lazy-minded voters, you're putting yourself into their camp. You can dish it out, but can you take it? It seems that things have gotten so polarized that neither the right nor the left can stand to even listen to each other. You see things from your narrow perspective, but you need to see the whole picture if you want the truth. By focusing only on Obama and what you consider his fatal flaws, you are avoiding the larger issue of who is the better choice for president of this country. To your points: 1. The Affordable Care Act is a good first step, it can be modified in the coming years into universal care. There's no way that Obama could have done any better with it. 2. I remind you that Barack Obama was against the wars that Bush so recklessly jumped into. He was left quite a mess in the Middle East and he did what he thought was best, aided by the advice of his Generals. If Bush hadn't invaded Afghanistan, NO innocent people would have died at all. 3. The "stupid" electorate did NOT vote for Obama. They didn't think there was any chance that he would be elected, he's black you know, and so they stayed home on election day. Even I, who worked hard for him, didn't think he would be president. However, they will be out in force on Tuesday and vote against this good man. He's black you know. cont.
 
 
+5 # genierae 2012-11-03 09:20
cont. 4. Every president makes promises that he isn't able to keep. I don't think that Obama realized the depth of the hatred that Republicans had for him, and thought he could work with them. They were plotting against him on the day he was inaugurated. He's black you know. Their top priority was not to fix the failing economy, but to destroy Obama's presidency. 5. There was no persistent pressure on him to move left, his base fragmented and a good part of it deserted him. They've turned into a peanut gallery where they take pleasure in chipping away at his legitimacy. 6. I'm not interested in revising history, I'm interested in the facts as they reveal themselves. They lead me always. 7. To any reasonable person there's no question about who would make the better president, and that is Barack Obama. Mitt Romney would take us right back to the madness of Bush and that would be the end of this democracy.
 
 
+18 # Barbara K 2012-11-02 04:43
Kayjay: If anyone has any doubts, check out this site and see what the Romneyhoods are doing. I've been wondering why Romney was running for President. It is obvious now that he is coming after OUR taxpayer money. Everyone, please check this out and PASS it on to all you know before it is too late:

http://seattletimes.com/html/opinion/2019582123_harropcolumntaggxml.html
 
 
+17 # doneasley 2012-11-02 09:14
Quoting Kayjay:
... And I would really like to see a follow up to news I hearrd through the grapevine, that the Romney family has ownership connections to vote tallying equipment in OHIO! Talk about a conflict of interest. If true.....Romney has NO business being on the ballot in that state. If someone knows more about this....make a stink. Vote Obama to snub Mittens.


I live in Ohio, Kayjay, and mum's the word from the mainstream media and other voices that can be heard. Here's a link to a story about OH voting machines.

http://www.dailykos.com/story/2012/10/23/1149088/-Romney-Family-Ownership-of-Ohio-Voting-Machines

Mendacious Mitt is a consummate LIAR. I still can't believe that - even though GMC and Chrysler management have refuted his story - Mitt still has not pulled his ad stating that Jeep is moving ALL production to China. How do you build an entire campaign on lies? And Lyin' Ryan is as bad or worse. Note that their campaign has kept Ryan away from audiences and media that would question him about his safety-net-shre dding budget and Far Right Tea Party ideology.
Thus far, the "Etch-A-Sketch" R/R team hasn't had to answer these questions, and I blame the Dems for that.

We must keep Mendacious Mitt's mitts away from the White House keys.
 
 
+74 # portiz 2012-11-01 18:18
I'm with you Mr. Ash. Without any doubt, Barack Obama will get my vote.
 
 
+85 # maddave 2012-11-01 19:54
I've long since given up judging Romney over his inability to distinguish truth from fiction ---- also over his habitually taking the major faults of himself and his own party, turning them around and attributing them to the Democrats and President Obama.

Those whom I DO NOT understand and whom I DO judge harshly are those individuals and groups that refuse to recognize just what the hell is going on --- and why. Let there be no doubt in ANYONE's mind: If Obama were a white anglo-saxon, he would be leading Romney by 20, points right now.
 
 
+27 # WestWinds 2012-11-01 20:15
>>> ...his habitually taking the major faults of himself and his own party, turning them around and attributing them to the Democrats and President Obama.
 
 
+18 # genierae 2012-11-02 05:20
Thank you maddave, I agree completely.
 
 
+11 # AMLLLLL 2012-11-02 10:32
Willard's one constant is that he wants to show up his dad and 'win' the Presidency. Governance is an afterthought and we can only look at his record in Mass. to see what that is like. 800+ line item vetoes which were many times overridden by a unanimous state legislature. That is not what 'bi-parisanship ' looks like. He left after the first term because the presidency was calling, and besides, he had a 38% approval rating. LOSER.
 
 
+76 # MEBrowning 2012-11-01 19:42
Romney's lying is not symptomatic of a pathological disorder. It's symptomatic of his party's zeal to win. Romney has investors to please, so he must win — regardless of the cost, regardless of the rules, regardless of who he steps on or whose lives he ruins. He will do anything, say anything, promise anything, to win. He must be stopped.
 
 
+43 # WestWinds 2012-11-01 20:18
Then this should be an easy decision:
Good people play by the rules and play fair. Conversely, bad people don't play by the rules and don't play fair. They are always looking for, or taking, or precipitating unfair leverage for an unfair (and unearned) advantage.
 
 
+25 # genierae 2012-11-02 05:38
Many intelligent, thoughtful people think that we are in the middle of a transition into a higher reality, and this polarization must happen in order to "separate the wheat from the chaff". I have never in my lifetime seen such a stark divide between the honest and dishonest people in this country. The Republican Party has always drawn the more corrupt persons in society, the ones who are the most selfish and mean-spirited, but now it is much worse. Democrats on the other hand, have drawn the people who care the most about others and want to make this country work for all of us. I am an independent so I am not partisan, and favoring Democrats is not being partisan anyway, it is simply choosing the party that cares about and supports the common good. If Obama and the Democrats take the majority, then we will move into the future with real change, but if Romney and the Republicans prevail we will regress. We are right on the tipping-point and not one person who cares about this country can afford to stay home on Tuesday.
 
 
-14 # btraven 2012-11-02 07:07
To: Marc & genierae.. Marc is saying is saying that we should vote for O. because he sees "a glimmer of understanding " in him. That is as weak an endorsement as making a decision to buy a used car from a salesman who you suspect has a glimmer of sympathy for your pocketbook.
And: genierae. making your decision to vote for Obama again is like buying a second used car from that same salesman who sold you the last lemon.
I see by the votes on Marc'S article that RSN has many 'liberal' readers who support O. As a lifelong PROGRESSIVE,(I voted for O.)who has fought many of the battles including WW II, I am saddened by those who do not see that they will get 4 more years of betrayal for their vote. I encourage you to read German post WW I history to see how the Social
Democratic Party sold out to the militarists, suppressed the progressives in the party and gave the nation to the Fascists. As Sinclair Lewis the author wrote many years ago: "IT CAN HAPPEN HERE". Sometimes the "lesser evil" really works out to be the "greater" because he fools the people into quiescence with his populace rhetoric.
 
 
0 # genierae 2012-11-02 15:12
Used cars btraven, really? President Obama has done a great job considering the unprecedented mess he inherited, the complete obstruction by the Republicans, and the desertion of his base right when he needed them. He had no one to support him in the crucial times, yet he accomplished a lot of good things. It took FDR three terms to muster up the courage to confront the plutocrats and get some things done, so why is Obama expected to do everything in four? You are not much of a serious thinker btraven, or you would come up with something better than used cars.
 
 
+51 # Regina 2012-11-01 21:28
Romney suffers from a peculiar mental state -- a royalty complex. Both Mitt and Ann truly see themselves as aristocrats, and the rest of us as mere peasants. He lusts for the White House as though it were a monarchial throne, the just reward for all the wealth he has been able to wrest and amass and exhibit in his vast estate (but not in his tax returns). Indeed, he has been pursuing that throne for at least six years, not just the current campaign. In the most literal sense, he thinks he's "entitled." How dare we underlings deny him? But he'll throw us a bone or two, and tell us whatever he fancies we want to hear, no matter the alternating contradictions, in order to cajole our vote.
 
 
-22 # aaheart 2012-11-01 23:09
I would agree that Wilbur is the worst of the two evils, but I watched Obama weasel around signing the NDAA 2012 with indefinite detention riding with the horsemen of the apocalypse. I watched as Obama went to war in Libya without congressional approval. I noticed no bankers have yet been put in jail whereas investigations have been dropped. I noticed torture is still permissible and Guantanamo is still open. I noticed that drone attacks in nations with whom we have not officially declared war have resulted in hundreds of extrajudicial murders. These are war crimes and crimes against humanity, not the work of a true Nobel Peace Laureate. I've noticed that two Americans were targeted by drones and murdered. Electing a bonafide war criminal as President brands American voters as accomplices for aiding and abetting war crimes and crimes against humanity.

Now I'll post this on Facebook just in case it doesn't get accepted here.
 
 
-9 # engelbach 2012-11-02 08:06
Your clear vision and honesty have earned you a slew of negatives from Obama worshippers. I gave you a positive.

It's interesting that the majority of posters here who profess to agree with Ash are ignoring the fact that Ash said essentially the same things as you.

Obama may be less bad that Romney, but "less bad" does not equal "good."
 
 
0 # maddave 2012-11-02 23:08
You are soooo right here, englebach, but in the frantic search to find the lesser evil . . . which, all agree, is not (necessarily) "good" . . . what do you propose that we do? Only Romney OR Obama can possibly win; consequently, a thrown-away vote or an abstention is automatically a half-a-vote for the dark side. (This IS NOT a racial pun - think "Star Wars".)
 
 
+21 # Barbara K 2012-11-02 04:49
Regina: Did you know that Romney was charged with Racketeering yesterday? The story is here and is a must see for everyone. Please everyone check it out and pass it on to all you know and wherever you can. Ed Show covered it last night, maybe you saw some there.

http://www.truth-out.org/buzzflash/commentary/item/17613-uaw-charges-romney-with-profiteering-from-auto-bailout
 
 
+11 # aaheart 2012-11-01 23:30
You think voting will stop Wilbur?

For at least the past four decades, the American election process has been controlled by corporations and agents connected to the Republican Party. This year’s “contest” is no different.

http://www.globalresearch.ca/has-the-election-already-been-stolen-for-romneyryan/5310166
 
 
+34 # dyannne 2012-11-01 20:00
We have to make the president do the right thing. We have to elect people to the Senate and to the House who will vote in our interests. We have to speak up, badger our officials with our demands, make phone calls, write letters, march, make a stink and get our friends to do the same in order to make our presence and wishes known. We can't sit back and loll on Facebook or watch games on TV and hope the president does all the work. He can't do it alone. He's actually told us that.
 
 
-13 # aaheart 2012-11-01 22:59
That game plan was advocated in 2008 when the bailout was before the House of Representatives . A wave of indignation from across the country said NO!!!

The House of Representatives said no.

So the criminals in government took the money bill to the Senate and violated the constitutional requirement that all money bills originate in the House and got the Senate to bend to the threats made by Hank Paulson and the 80% outrage of the people was discarded.

Then the money bill went to the House and they bent to the threat of martial law and passed the bailout bill.

So much for doing all that you have advocated...it did NOT work and we have been saddled with a horrific debt that has drained the treasury and the wealth of the people while the bankers gave themselves big bonuses.
 
 
+12 # Sacrebleu! 2012-11-02 06:10
That was under the dimWit, remember?
 
 
-12 # engelbach 2012-11-02 08:11
Congress was completely in control of the Democrats at the time. They willingly went along with Bush on every one of his policies.
 
 
-11 # aaheart 2012-11-02 09:04
Sacrebleu! It works all the same with nost of the same players in the game. dimWit was only in charge of the executive branch and the Dems dominated Congress.

Now about this dimWit, what do you really remember about the bailout?
 
 
+9 # Sacrebleu! 2012-11-02 06:09
FDR told us that. What a great man he was!
 
 
+16 # Sacrebleu! 2012-11-02 06:37
I found the quote:

"The first truth is that the liberty of a democracy is not safe if the people tolerate the growth of private power to a point where it becomes stronger than their democratic state itself. That, in its essence, is fascism - ownership of government by an individual, by a group, or by any other controlling private power. "

-Franklin D. Roosevelt, "Message from the President of the United States Transmitting Recommendations Relative to the Strengthening and Enforcement of Anti-trust Laws"
 
 
-8 # aaheart 2012-11-02 11:15
President Roosevelt put Powell, Knox and Forrestal under armed Marine guard until after the Pearl Harbor attack. He sent a message to Lt. Col. Clifford M. Andrew, Intelligence officer at Army Intelligence in Hawaii, which read: "The Japanese will attack, do not prepare defenses, we need the full support of the American Nation in a war time effort by an unprovoked attack upon the Nation."
 
 
-13 # aaheart 2012-11-02 11:12
FDR brought communists into the government wholesale and kept the communists that Hoover had brought in.

FDR knew the Japanese would attack Pearl Harbor and kept Rear Admiral Paulus Prince Powell, Undersecretary of the Navy James Forrestal, and Secretary of the Navy Frank Knox under arrest for 66 hours after they had received a message from Hawai'i that the Japanese were approaching Pearl Harbor. They wanted to move the fleet at Pearl Harbor out to sea. They were held at gunpoint until after the attack.

World War II would have ended in 1943 if FDR had accepted the German Army's offer of an honorable surrender in which case they would arrest Hitler and his Nazis and turn the German Army around to face the Soviet Red Army on the eastern front to asve Europe from Communist oppression. FDR refused.

FDR made choices that prolonged the Great depression into 1940, 11 years of suffering in poverty for many Americans.

Great man and Franklin Roosevelt should not be used in the same sentence.
 
 
-7 # engelbach 2012-11-02 08:10
Obama has essentially said that he can't do it, period. He's all rhetoric and no fight.

He was pushed, and pushed hard, by progressives, during sellout after sellout. He responded by calling them "the professional left."

The duopoly in America is completely in the hands of the ruling class. The GOP may be on our necks, but the Democrats have no will or desire to pull them off.

By all means re-elect Obama to avoid Romney. But don't have any illusions about him.

Labor Party 2016.
 
 
-6 # aaheart 2012-11-02 09:13
Better yet, noncompliance on a daily basis. Voting is one of the shock tests to measure the appropriate time to close the gates and bring down fierce oppression. See Silent Weapons for Quiet Wars at http://www.real-debt-elimination.com/tax_freedom/silent_weapons_for_quiet_wars.htm

The other test for compliance is the payment of income taxes. Voting and paying taxes are key measures of compliance that trigger the onset of the New World Order. Not enough people complained about the 923 executive orders Obama issued or about the NDAA 2012 which included indefinite detention that he signed.
 
 
+17 # WestWinds 2012-11-01 20:01
I vote for "pathologic disorder".
 
 
+31 # jsheats 2012-11-01 20:06
There is a key maxim about "Change from the top", recognized by the best practitioners, that is has to be forced by pressure from the bottom. Philip Burton, an old-style politician from the smoke-filled room era, gave us the biggest expansion of wilderness area the country has ever seen. But he told representatives of the Sierra Club that he could only do it if they pushed him with sufficient vigor.

This is just human nature; it will never be fixed by any saint riding in on a white horse. We need a leader who is willing to accept our push, and I believe Obama has shown not only a willingness but a desire to do that. His biggest deficiencies are that he is not an inspiring orator as President (though I still feel comforted by his calm and measured style), and he has had much to learn about management. He may have learned some of those lessons. But we are not relieved of our obligation to provide the motive force.

Anyone who doesn't vote for him due to disagreement with any particular failing is effectively voting for true disaster.
 
 
-38 # aaheart 2012-11-01 22:53
Like Obama, Stalin offered hope and change. Like Obama, Stalin was a committed socialist who had a meteoric rise to the top. Like Obama, Stalin issued executive orders that created state ownership of everything. Like Obama, Stalin arranged for indefinite detention without due process.

"Forward" is a popular slogan used by Mao, Stalin, Hitler, and other well known socialists. The pattern is well-known to those who pay attention to history.
 
 
+12 # genierae 2012-11-02 05:58
Demonizing Democrats is a well-known practice of the right-wing extremists in this country. You are doing their work whether you belong to their party or not. Voting for the person who will benefit the common good the most is our only sane choice, and attacking him serves no useful purpose. President Obama has set this country on the right track and if we support and push him for four more years, we will see a new world.
 
 
-11 # aaheart 2012-11-02 09:20
You certainly will see a New World Order. Choosing from the list you are provided is not much different than an election held in the USSR that legitimated Stalin. The only difference is that two parties must be under control instead of just one.

A foreign policy of war crimes and crimes against humanity is nothing of which I could be proud...how do you manage that? Do you close your eyes to the drone attacks in an undeclared war? Do you close your eyes to the support of the Free NonSyrian Army killing Christians and Muslims alike? Can you not see your own complicity in the attacks on the peaceful nation of Libya? You can't see how much you've been lied to? Stupidity and ignorance are no defense for war crimes and crimes against humanity...you are guilty nevertheless.
 
 
+8 # genierae 2012-11-02 15:31
It was Bush and the neo-cons who got us into two unnecessary wars, letting the CIA and contractors run amok, working their dark arts undercover, destroying any chance for Middle East peace. For eight years Bush allowed this insanity to continue, till the CIA, Blackwater, etal, all grew out of control. Now the very same neo-cons are advisers to Romney, and are pushing him to finish the job that Bush began. So are you saying that Romney should be elected? It's easy to sit back and complain, but if you're so smart, what would you do if you were president? As for me, I will vote for the better man, I will vote for Obama.
 
 
+17 # Sacrebleu! 2012-11-02 06:16
Like Hitler, Romney is wedded with big business and like Mussolini he wants the corporate world to be be more powerful than the government.

Comparing people to bogeymen can lead you astray. Stop the shrill and try to reason.

Hitler, socialist?
If just because the S in NSDAP means Sozialistische you call Hitler a socialist, then I guess you will say that North Korea is popular, democratic and a republic.

Obama, socialist?
Not even close, dude.
 
 
-11 # aaheart 2012-11-02 09:28
Obama is an international socialist whereas Hitler was a national socialist. Works the same. Your blindness to the obvious is no defense to the charge of war crimes and crimes against humanity. In addition, Obama entered the war on Libya without Congressional consent, a violation of the US Constitution, and therefore treason. NDAA 2012 is in violation of the US Constitution according to the Federal Judge and that ruling is now under appeal by Obama's Department of "Justice", the same group that provided thousands of military grade weapons to the Mexican drug cartels, causing the deaths of thousands of Mexicans...anot her war crime against the people of Mexico. You are picking up a very heavy karmic load Sb....
 
 
+2 # Cassandra2012 2012-11-03 12:05
"Fascism should rather be called corporatism, as it is the merging of government and corporate power." --Benito Mussolini
 
 
-10 # engelbach 2012-11-02 08:13
Obama's response to being pushed was to brand progressives "the professional left."

A vote for Romney puts the nation over a cliff. A vote for Obama puts it over a mountain. Slower, but with the same outcome.

Labor Party 2016.
 
 
+8 # Douglas Jack 2012-11-01 20:38
Real News interview by Paul Jay with Greg Palast YouTube Easy Ways to Steal an Election http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9e30fJuWqVc&feature=g-user-u

David L. Dill https://www.verifiedvoting.org/resources/voting-equipment/ one of the leading US organizations concerning US right-to-vote & verifiable voting systems concludes that;
“Far too many states use unreliable and insecure electronic voting machines, and many states have made their situation worse by adding some forms of Internet voting for somevoters, which cannot be checked for accuracy at all. Even in states where verifiable systems are used, too often the check on the voting system’s function and accuracy is not done. In 2012, the voting systems now in use are aging; resources are severely impacted by the state of the economy over thepast several years; shortages of both equipment and human resources are likely. After all the effort necessary to overcome the other hurdles to casting a ballot, it is patently unfair that once you get to the ballot box, that the ballot itself fails you. Taken together, these problems threaten to silently disenfranchise voters, potentially in sufficient numbers to alter outcomes”.
Can Barack Obama by executive order, defer the election for 4 months until verifiable computer voting with paper receipts can be made available to all states? Sovereign democracy here is 'indigenous' First Nation. https://sites.google.com/site/indigenecommunity/relational-economy/8-economic-democracy
 
 
+15 # Reyn 2012-11-02 05:37
No he absolutely cannot and it would end all Democratic and liberal power in the country for generations if he tried. (You did ask, and I'm giving you an honest answer)

What he can do is direct that "random" machines be "checked for accuracy" -- overriding state contracts, and have a selection of, say 20 machines that have been "patched" in OH picked up -- and put the BEST programmers on those software patches. If they, as more people than anyone realizes suspect, flip votes inside the machine in no-paper-trail precincts to the GOP, he can IN ADVANCE OF THE ELECTION take action, have the executives of the company arrested and charged with conspiracy to overthrow the lawful government of the United States (which is actually what they are trying to do in that case, for real) and order all voting in OH to be on paper and hand counted. That would solve the problem for this year, put the fear of divinity into the other (all GOP owned) voting machine and counting companies and get a REAL discussion started about vote security. Talking about it here is meaningless - it has to come from the mass of low-information voters becoming aware that someone could steal THEIR votes.

Those things he could do, its still politically risky, but the GOP has provided a clear out "but you've been saying you want vote security and an end to fraud for years, don't you agree to this effort??? Why????"
 
 
-9 # aaheart 2012-11-02 09:38
But Reyn...he won't check the machines for accuracy because he knows it's HIS elite masters as well as Romney's who are skewing elections to their benefit. Tweedledee and Tweedledum are the limited choices you are given so that you can pretend to have a voice in your government. The shadow elite are watching to see how much compliance their efforts are bringing and you will willingly comply? Noncompliance and education are the only nonviolent ways to bring change and you don't show any evidence of either. Read Silent Weapons for Quiet Wars: The Central Control of the New World Order to understand the logical sociopathy that is the foundation of this tyranny. Use the exact title in your search and you will find the authentic copy.
 
 
-18 # dickmail 2012-11-01 21:01
We voted for Obama & change
What they got was a president who took the entire defense department bureaucracy of a previously discredited administration into his administration inclusive of the Generals, Secretary of Defense and all the rest ( this has never happened before); then gave us more phony war. While president Obama was receiving the “Nobel Peace prize” he simultaneously and successfully defended the architect of torture in a San Francisco federal court. In addition, he sidetracked attempts of the ACLU to remove the illegal overseas prisons and never gave even a feeble attempt to close the infamous Guantanamo prison. He has never tried to return our revered habeas corpus or remove the immoral, illegal, Patriot Act. As this is written he has placed ill advised military intimidation and economic sanctions over innocent Iranian people and continues to fund the illegal Zionist settlers three generations removed from WWII, (many from New York) in the Middle East. Recently Obama signed a law (National Defense Authorization Act) making the “Patriot Act” permanent and the USA is now officially a military/police state with the habeas corpus long gone.
 
 
+9 # Sacrebleu! 2012-11-02 06:19
"WE voted for Obama & change
What THEY got was a president who..."

Hey buddy, if you want to earn your check from the RNC, try at least to be creative and avoid copy/pasting your comments from one page to the other.

Especially when they are as grossly from a troll as this one.

The good news is your employment is nearly over. See you in the stats on Wednesday morning.
 
 
-9 # engelbach 2012-11-02 08:19
Trolls post inflammatory provocations devoid of content.

But dickmail did a pretty good job of itemizing the facts of Obama's presidency. I don't see anything in your post refuting any of his points.

Accusing him of being from the RNC is silly. The GOP would have done exactly as Obama has done.

dickmail echoes the sentiments of everyone who voted for Obama and expected him to fight for his promises. They would never elect a Romney, and you have no right to smear them as GOP supporters.
 
 
+5 # Billy Bob 2012-11-02 10:52
...even though their goals are exactly the same.
 
 
-4 # engelbach 2012-11-03 04:52
Oh, please. Those who would push the government further to left are exactly the same as those who would create a de facto theocracy of it?

Learn the difference between left and right. I assure you that you're further to the right than most of the people who voted for Obama.
 
 
-9 # aaheart 2012-11-02 09:46
Your post included name-calling, did not address the content of dickmail's post, and was devoid of any serious comment. Just cheerleading the crowning of the Nobel Laureate warmonger and murderer puts you in a special class...how special...
 
 
+29 # Robert B 2012-11-01 21:11
Faint praise like this is not what landslides are made of. "A glimmer of understanding" isn't much of a rallying cry. I guess you think you're being even-handed with your litany of Obama's sins, but I think he's a far better President than you give him credit for.
 
 
-7 # rjmcca22 2012-11-01 21:55
I've voted for every Democrat since Kennedy and I've watched the major parties completely destroy every value and tradition that America has stood for, despite my support for the Democratic leaders. And no one is ever held accountable. It took a mass defection by Democrats to give George Bush his tax cut and Obama extended it. Meanwhile, Rocky Anderson has promised to advance real progressive legislative priorities. So why should I not vote for Anderson? The apologists perpetuate the regressive status quo by falling in line even when the policy positions of the Democrats are dragging the Party to the right, which they now call the center. The corruption is in plain view anymore. They don't even try to hide it. Obama will disappoint us in his second term. Its the only promise that he keeps. I'll vote straight Democratic for all the other office seekers because we need Nancy Pelosi back as Speaker. With Pelosi in the House and Elizabeth Warren in the Senate, I would have hope again. Its a start. I live in a solid blue state, so Obama will win by a landslide, but in this presidential election, Anderson will get my vote.
 
 
+15 # Sacrebleu! 2012-11-02 06:27
The solution is reforming the elections:

Get money out of it
- Repeal Citizens United (sign up at www.movetoamend.org)
- Publicly funded campaigns
- Strict caps on campaigns budgets
- NO political or "issue" ads. Period.

Open the market of ideas
- One single primary with all eligible candidates regardless of party
- The best two have a run off two weeks or a month later

Make sure every vote is actually cast and counts exactly one time.
- Mandatory jail time for elections rigging
- Mandatory paper traces
- Mandatory vote: fine if no vote
- Distinguish null vote from white vote: white vote means "support the winner to give him/er a substantial majority so s/he can govern"
- Mandatory openness of the SW and HW in any voting machine - that these are controlled by private corporations and that the result cannot be verified just means the programmers can decide who wins without any possible oversight.

Short of these (except maybe the mandate to vote) there is no real democracy but shades of plutocracy, corporatocracy, kleptocracy or cronyismocracy.
 
 
-8 # aaheart 2012-11-02 09:51
And yet in your posts above you advocate voting in an election that you now admits is more a shade of plutocracy, corporatocracy, kleptocroacy or cronyocracy than democracy.
 
 
+20 # PrinceDarrell 2012-11-01 22:00
The list of Imperial wrongs has continued in the age of Obama, far more than we had hoped.Reluctant at times to fight and somewhat complicit in his choices from the corporate state.. But thoughtful, capable, and took the reins with things a mess, and kept them moving forward. Comparisons to FDR can't start yet, but most others would have gotten folded. The other choice, Wall Street executive who changes positions, and advocates failed economic policy of cutting taxes of the wealthy when theres a deficit? Rolling back our social safety net and expanding the war budget? Trying to regulate Wall street LESS?
This is no choice at all, for a sane person.
No, Obama has forwarded the alternative energy agenda, funding for mass transit. Our objections is that he has not gone far enough, and we all are responsible for moving us forward faster and better.
 
 
+16 # Sacrebleu! 2012-11-02 06:28
Romney is not against the safety net under the trapeze artists.
He just wants to put lay it out on the ground to save on poles.
 
 
-25 # Antemedius 2012-11-01 22:10
Of course he is.

If Romney is elected and tries an ongoing campaign of extra-judicial assassination, gives a cold shoulder to the systemic oppression of civil liberties, encourages a Justice Department that stands blind and mute as corporate corruption devours the soul of the nation, and displays an indifference to environmental suicide that borders on contempt, Obama supporters all over the country will be screaming for his impeachment for the next 4 years while they pretend all over again to be opposed to all this crap.

Romney hasn't got a hope in hell. He could never get away with all the bs Obama gets away with so easily and still have people cheering.

But Romney will be happy anyway. Romney "works" for Obama. His entire campaign performance is designed to get Obama re-elected.

He's already getting all the policies of any republicans wet dream from Obama, without having to get up in the morning and show up at the office.

From his or any republicans perspective, why would he want to mess up what he thinks he wants when he's already got it and he can let Obama take the blame?

The whole two party system is a set up. A con job. A circus show put on to fool people into thinking they're making a choice.

A suckers game.

Like a football game where the team owners rake in the millions while they couldn't care less which team the marks in the audience wave pom poms for, as long as they show up and buy tickets.
 
 
+8 # stonecutter 2012-11-02 01:34
That's what I love, good ol' American glass-is-half-f ull optimism and good will.
 
 
+17 # Reyn 2012-11-02 05:40
You GREATLY overestimate us I think, as a people.

Ah - of course, you are a third party advocate, and like all such people have to convince voters that there is a real choice, that people should vote for "another candidate" thus guaranteeing the worst of two candidates to take office.

Like what happened with Al Gore.

No thanks, the buyer's remorse for Mr. Romney would just be too high.

Obama/Biden 2012
 
 
-8 # Antemedius 2012-11-02 06:26
October 24, 2012
............................
President Barack Obama laid out an astoundingly ambitious second-term agenda in an interview published Wednesday, vowing to forge a "grand bargain" with Republicans to reduce the national debt and achieve comprehensive immigration reform—all in 2013.

"It will probably be messy. It won't be pleasant," Obama told the Des Moines Register's publisher and its editor by telephone. The daily made the exchange public after the White House dropped its insistence that it be off-the-record.
[snip]
Obama signaled that his long-standing offer for deficit and debt reduction will still be on the table, a move that could irk Democrats.

"I am absolutely confident that we can get what is the equivalent of the grand bargain that essentially I've been offering to the Republicans for a very long time, which is $2.50 worth of cuts for every dollar in spending, and work to reduce the costs of our health care programs," Obama said. (The White House quickly clarified that he meant $2.50 of spending cuts for every dollar in new tax revenue.)

"We can easily meet—'easily' is the wrong word—we can credibly meet the target that the Bowles-Simpson Commission established of $4 trillion in deficit reduction, and even more in the out-years,
..............................
http://news.yahoo.com/blogs/ticket/obama-vows-debt-cutting-grand-bargain-immigration-reform-142348400--election.html
 
 
+3 # Billy Bob 2012-11-02 06:27
I've asked him who he plans to vote for for about a month now. He always slithers away without answering. You've hit the nail on the head with your summation. Of all the 3rd partiers on this sight, Antemedius is the one who's agenda seems most transparent to just discourage enthusiasm.
 
 
-8 # aaheart 2012-11-02 10:08
And enthusiasm seems to be generally lacking but for a few cheerleaders and a rowsing band. C'mon everybody let's get enthusiastic about undeclared wars, extrajudicial assassinations of civilians and Americans, indefinite detention without due process, eliminate habeas corpus, over 900 executive orders to enlarge presidential powers, nationalization of personal checking accounts and private property, confiscation of food supplies and food production, elimination of farmer's markets and backyard gardening, ready access of American gun markets for Mexican drug cartels while restricting gun ownership for American citizens...take s a lot of cheerleading and beating the drum to drown out the loss of your freedoms and threates to your lives in the next few years...
 
 
-7 # Antemedius 2012-11-02 06:29
"overestimate"? A little Freudian slip slip, I guess.

.........................................
Voting for the lesser of evils is not a plan for changing our country; it is acquiescence to endless war, unregulated capitalism and a corrupt system whereby corporations control Washington and the News Media. In 2008 President Obama did not campaign on delivering more Bush administration policies -- on steroids - but that is precisely what he did. Now, on the campaign trail once again President Obama is predictably talking about bringing change to Washington and moving forward. Why would any rational progressive think that he really means it this time around? Unrestrained by another run for the Presidency, Barack Obama will be free in his second term to move his agenda even further to the right than he already has, just as Bill Clinton did in his second term. There is no greater audacity I can think of beyond President Obama promising hope and change in his campaign, but instead embracing nearly every Bush/Cheney administration policy despised by progressives, and then expecting progressives to come out to vote for him again.
.........................................
http://www.opednews.com/populum/printer_friendly.php?content=a&id=157595
 
 
+6 # Billy Bob 2012-11-02 06:25
Who do you plan to vote for, and why? It's not a trick question.
 
 
-8 # Antemedius 2012-11-02 06:31
Someone who'll take a vote away from Romney/Obama and the two party scam.
 
 
+4 # Billy Bob 2012-11-02 10:35
I said "WHO", and so far all you've given is, YET ANOTHER plug for your blog.

You're out for advertising dollars. That's all you care about.
 
 
+4 # Sacrebleu! 2012-11-02 06:30
What a remarkable collection of nonsense weaved with actual observable facts - the essence of great conspiracy theory.
Excuse my accent: I am holding my nose.
 
 
-4 # aaheart 2012-11-02 09:59
You have told it too straight for the rubes in the stands and they don't like being shown up as marks and suckers. They are needing cheerleaders right now to tell them that they are doing a great job supporting the Candidate who brings hope and change you can believe in.
They need a band to lead them Forward into a New World...Order. Seductive, isn't it...
 
 
-4 # jky1291 2012-11-02 12:41
Despite the disapproval displayed, the message that the entire Republican presidential campaign was merely a smoke and mirrors scheme by the corporations to hide the fact that President Obama really is their choice is a valid observation that became apparent by the sorry field of candidates that were presented to allow Romney to appear viable, but still insure President Obama's reelection.
 
 
-11 # napmoo 2012-11-01 22:14
Wiser Path? Really? Seriously??
Joss Whedon's impassioned plea for Mitt-ens on Youtube notwithstanding , Obama is the man who SIGNED the most atrocious piece of legislation EVER, the NDAA. Why is this ignored? Obama is not our friend but a marginally better glossed puppet. Want a rallying cry? Stop abdicating YOUR power to all of these sock puppets. As George Carlin said: "If I don't vote you can't blame me!" and no, you DON'T lose your say if you don't vote, you maintain YOUR POWER by not abdicating it. The senseless, no-win game thrives on your support of it. Let it die of thirst as it deserves.
 
 
-6 # aaheart 2012-11-01 22:44
John Corzine is not already in prison for stealing over a billion dollars because Obama is in the Whitehouse. NDAA 2012 indefinite detention and 923 executive orders have placed the entire nation on notice that their freedoms and lives are at risk under Obama. Wilbur Romney is an idiot and anyone who thinks voting for a "lesser to two evils" is a real choice for Americans, is ensuring evil even though a vote for anyone else is a "wasted vote". Voting in a time a mass voting fraud will not ensure that ANY votes truly count...in fact ALL VOTING is wasted when voting fraud is how the game is played.
 
 
+6 # Sacrebleu! 2012-11-02 06:31
And so? What do you advise?
 
 
0 # aaheart 2012-11-02 10:15
Non-compliance! !!! That's the only measure the sociopaths who co-opted the American voting system understand. Gandhi taught non-compliance as the only antidote to tyranny. So did Martin Luther King, Jr. American elections are no different than Stalin's except that took more overt violence to accomplish.
 
 
-3 # Abu Elias 2012-11-01 23:05
It doesn't matter one bit who is elected. What really matters are the puppeteers who operate behind the scene. The whole system is an exercise in fake democracy and will remain so as long as it is open to the corrupting influence of the financial backers. One should read Douglas Reed's invaluable book The Controversy of Zion.
 
 
0 # Cassandra2012 2012-11-03 12:10
bigot
 
 
+5 # RicKelis 2012-11-02 01:02
Marc describes Barack Obama in terms of wisdom -- using the phrase "the wiser path." "Wiser" is an apropos term, if we can recognize that Obama is an Enlightened Being: an enlightened being with a well-ordered mind, aligned to the Natural Cycle of Life. Those who understand this will understand Barack Obama.
 
 
-2 # aaheart 2012-11-02 10:20
Enlightened beings don't rain death upon innocent civilians, women and children. Enlightened beings don't condone torture and murder. Enlightened beings don't accept indefinite detention and Star Chamber injustice.
 
 
+21 # Ralph Averill 2012-11-02 01:13
It is difficult to know if Mitt Romney's bald-face lying is intended to convince voters or himself, or is simply symptomatic of some pathological disorder."
My money is on pathological disorder.
 
 
+11 # Billy Bob 2012-11-02 06:28
Why not both? I think the pathological disorder isn't lying. It's greed for power. He wants to prove something to his daddy. He wants my family to suffer as a consequence. I'm voting for my family.
 
 
+13 # Sacrebleu! 2012-11-02 06:37
Psychologists who developed a test to measure sociopathy (i.e. lack of empathy, "me above the others", "what others?", ...) were aghast to discover it was used by corporations not to weed them out but to select their executives.

What does that tell you about whether a corporate bully like Rmoney cares for your actual needs?
 
 
-4 # aaheart 2012-11-02 10:32
In 2008, corporations such as Goldman Sachs selected their choice of chief executive of the USA...Obama ...what does that tell you?
 
 
+6 # Billy Bob 2012-11-02 10:54
Upperclass Twit's top 5 sources of donations:
1. Goldman Sachs
2. Bank of America
3. Morgan Stanley
4. Credit Suisse
5. Wells Fargo

President Obama's top 5 sources of donations:
1. University of California
2. Microsoft
3. Google
4. government employees
5. Harvard

QUESTION: Is it possible Goldman Sachs knows something about the difference between them that you don't?
 
 
-7 # aaheart 2012-11-02 11:48
You didn't notice that I posted that Obama was originally brought into office by the likes of Goldman Sachs and other corporations and they got what they wanted? Now they need another sociopath in the Chief Executive role as President. Perhaps one of them is now considered more sociopathic than the other, or that the work that one of the two sociopaths has accomplished permits the hiring of another sociopath to accomplish other equally sociopathic goals.

And by the way, the University of California, Microsoft, Google and Harvard are all corporations... and government employees work for one of the biggest corporations.
 
 
-6 # Antemedius 2012-11-02 12:20
......................
President Barack Obama's latest bundler numbers are in, and 120 names are new to the list from the third quarter, including some that are familiar for other reasons. The president now has a total of 758 bundlers -- or individuals who raise money from friends and acquaintances to deliver a candidate a bundle of checks.

Sitting at the top of the list of industries for Obama's bundlers this election cycle are lawyers and law firms. At least $41.8 million has been raised for the president from 178 bundlers in this employment category. Wall Street -- the securities and investment industry -- has brought in at least $21.9 million via 90 bundlers.

In the third quarter alone -- July 1 through Sept. 30 -- lawyers finished at the top with at least $3.2 million, with Hollywood and Wall Street not far behind with minimums of almost $1.4 million and $1.1 million, respectively.
......................

OpenSecrets.org, October 23, 2012
In Third Quarter, Obama Gains 120 New Bundlers, At Least $37.25 Million
http://www.opensecrets.org/news/2012/10/in-third-quarter-obama-gains-120-ne.html
 
 
+2 # Billy Bob 2012-11-02 10:54
So actually it tells me that you haven't looked into this very deeply.
 
 
+2 # MindDoc 2012-11-02 19:54
fwiw - "Lack of empathy" etc, exactly so. Interesting, psychologically . ;-) Sociopaths also are characterized by *feeling of entitlement*, lack of guilt (or concern) about non-stop lies and collateral damage, and feeling justified since in the end 'people get what they deserve', The most "successful sociopaths" are usually quite charming, clever and used to getting their way. Many notable achievers, pioneers, celebrities, politicians, lobbyists etc. mixed in. And more than a few untouchable criminals among all the above.

Just saying... As political consultant Drew Westin has said recently, it's up to us to decide who's a real deal and who is playing a role with a changeable binder full of scrips. ;-)
 
 
+1 # Cassandra2012 2012-11-03 12:12
Asberger's syndrome?
 
 
+1 # MindDoc 2012-11-03 20:29
That might fit the awkwardness and failure to read others automatically (empathize) - without being taught or having 'data' like charts & graphs... BUT, importantly, in addition to the "little professor" analytic aspects of Aspergers, it's almost always the case that there is also a super honesty, often an inability to be tactful or nuanced, which can lead to difficulties. My point is (here) - that Aspergians are typically very honest, painfully so, but also do have likes and positions and beliefs. But they are not what one thinks of as "pathological liars". It's the latter who are far more dangerous, and with sociopaths they care not a whit and can be forever placing bets, conning the odds, scamming, lying, and not differentiating between truth or fiction if it fits the situation and momentary need. No guilt. Salesmen, con artists, and politicians are perfect occupations for any and all of the aforementioned!
 
 
+23 # opinionaire 2012-11-02 05:23
Should the vote go to Romney, it would seem reasonable for every voting machine in the country to be confiscated and evaluated immediately for any tampering or hacking. Statisticians have demonstrated that particularly in high population density areas, some machines count whole votes for Republicans and .9 for Democrats; this cannot stand. Also, the nation should OWN the voting machines and gaurd them carefully; Tagg Romney owning a piece of Ohio's action is just frightening-and dead wrong.
 
 
+9 # Billy Bob 2012-11-02 06:30
If romney wins, he'll also control the House. Don't expect any investigation to occur. If it does, it will be to investigate whether or not too many minorities voted.
 
 
+14 # Barbara K 2012-11-02 06:37
There is no end to the corruptness of the Romneys. Please check this out and pass it on wherever you can. There is no time to waste. We now know why he wants to be President:

http://seattletimes.com/html/o...
 
 
-11 # Diane Gee 2012-11-02 06:43
I *cannot* believe you caved to lesser of the evilism.

How can we reach the 5% necessary to garner federal funds for a 3rd party and a place at the table, when every 4 years Leftists sell their ideals to the kabuki theater and vote center/right for one of the proffered Uniparty?

So for 3 years and 11 months you are a Left Activist, and the only month that counts you become a brand-D voter for the status quo?

I am sickened and saddened that you will not use your voice to support the Green Party at the very least.
 
 
+6 # Robert B 2012-11-02 09:43
I live in northern New Mexico. When our Congressman Bill Richardson was appointed by Bill Clinton to be the U.S. Ambassador to the U.N., there was a special election to fill his House seat. Enter Green Party candidate Carol Miller. She got 17% of the vote – a record, I believe – and what do you suppose happened? We got stuck with right-wing nutcase Bill Redmond. I am using my voice to support the DEMOCRATIC PARTY! And if I ever meet Ralph Nader, I intend to kick him in both shins.
 
 
-6 # Antemedius 2012-11-02 10:20
It was democratic party corruption and a weak democratic candidate that caused your problem.

..............
BACKGROUND FOR THE 1998 ELECTION
Given these characteristics , it was surprising that the Republicans were able to win the seat in a 1997 special election. Since its inception in 1982, the Third Congressional seat had always been held by a Democrat (Bill Richardson) and always by safe margins. In 1996, Richardson easily beat the Republican candidate Bill Redmond (67.2% to 30.5%). But in early 1997, Richardson resigned to take a post at the United Nations, creating the need for a special election. This unique election environment allowed for a party turnover, with Republican Bill Redmond winning the seat with 43 percent of the vote. Three factors were key to his special election success: first, a weak Democratic candidate with high negatives who was believed to have manipulated the nomination process (candidates were chosen through party chairs and not in a traditional primary setting); second, low voter turnout (35 percent); and third, Green Party candidate Carol A. Miller received 17 percent of the vote. Carol Miller’s candidacy gave an additional choice to traditional Democratic voters who had difficulty supporting the party nominee.
..............
1998 NEW MEXICO’S THIRD CONGRESSIONAL DISTRICT RACE
BY LONNA ATKESON AND ANTHONY C. COVENY
http://polisci.unm.edu/common/documents/c-sved/papers/ch9-nm3.doc
 
 
+5 # Billy Bob 2012-11-02 10:37
Haven't you generated enough advertising traffic to your blog, YET? Who do YOU plan to vote for and why?
 
 
+5 # Billy Bob 2012-11-02 10:55
Give me negatives all you want, but I'm going to keep asking you.
 
 
+2 # jky1291 2012-11-02 17:30
While I agree with your sentiment concerning the 2 corrupt corporate political parties and appreciate your desire for a viable alternative, personally I find that the Green Party platform is a laundry list pandering to too many special interests with too many negatives for broad enough support to defeat the most powerful forces of money and corruption this world has ever seen. Alternatively, I would encourage every intelligent citizen wishing to save our nation to identify, recruit, and elect a 3rd Party presidential candidate who supports the limited, but essential for success, goals presented in the Contract for the American Dream upon which nearly everyone can agree, with opposition from only those supporting the status quo of the wealthy 1%.

http://contract.rebuildthedream.com/?rc=rtd_home

We cannot afford to diminish a unified sentiment that the status quo is unsustainable by overreaching with a pie in the sky platform that peals away critical support with every additional plank beyond the bare essentials we require to achieve fundamental changes in our political and economic systems to reestablish "government of the people, by the people, for the people".
 
 
+3 # jky1291 2012-11-02 17:31
As you devoted posters on RSN know, I have been and still am a firm believer that we need a viable 3rd Party presidential candidate to salvage our nation from the challenges we face. But, with 6 - 9 billion dollars being projected to be spent on this election, no non corporate independent 3rd party candidate superior to President Obama was willing to expose themselves to the reprehensible abuse being heaped on the opponents of the multinational corporations' funded U. S. Chamber of Commerce and all the other undisclosed billionaires' phony "educational" Super PAC's. Despite that fact I would have been willing to deny President Obama my vote for his complicity in his corporate acquiescences, and let the chips fall where they may, until Romney's threat to position Paul Ryan a heartbeat away from imposition of the Fourth Reich. I still have reservations about President Obama's ability to substantially overcome corporate control of our total government, but I have no such reservations concerning the total demise of this country descending into apocalyptic civil war resulting from the 1%'s total enslavement of the 99% under a Ryan influenced administration. The destruction of the great state of Wisconsin was just a trial run for the dictatorship of the 1% over the entire world. VOTE FOR OBAMA! or be responsible for the self-fulfilling religious prophesies of Armageddon. A vote for Obama is a vote AGAINST RYAN!
 
 
+9 # panhead49 2012-11-02 07:39
Have a brother that was cooking meth and mainlining about an ounce a week of pure liquid for a long time before his life was finally saved be a sufficient time behind bars (rehab won't work if you're not ready to quit - the court gave him several chances). He did his time. Rebuilt his life with the help of family and the kindness of non-family members. And he's turned into a Mitt Romney. Do I think Mitt is a tweeker - no. But I do think he is missing the same mental filters that meth use also eviscerates. So Mitt's missing filters are congenital - the damage done is the same regardless a causality.
 
 
-8 # Antemedius 2012-11-02 07:51
20 October 2012:
........................................
The Mail on Sunday today reveals shocking new evidence of the full horrific impact of US drone attacks in Pakistan.

A damning dossier assembled from exhaustive research into the strikes’ targets sets out in heartbreaking detail the deaths of teachers, students and Pakistani policemen. It also describes how bereaved relatives are forced to gather their loved ones’ dismembered body parts in the aftermath of strikes.
[...snip...]
According to a report last month by academics at Stanford and New York universities, between 2,562 and 3,325 people have been killed since the strikes in Pakistan began in 2004.

The report said of those, up to 881 were civilians, including 176 children. Only 41 people who had died had been confirmed as ‘high-value’ terrorist targets.
[...snip...]
In his only acknowledgement that the US has ever launched such attacks at all, President Barack Obama said in January: ‘This is a targeted, focused effort at people who are on a list of active terrorists, who are trying to go in and harm Americans.’
........................................
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2220828/US-drone-attacks-CIA-chiefs-face-arrest-horrific-evidence-bloody-video-game-sorties.html
 
 
-10 # Antemedius 2012-11-02 07:57
25 October 12:
...................
Britain has rebuffed US pleas to use military bases in the UK to support the build-up of forces in the Gulf, citing secret legal advice which states that any pre-emptive strike on Iran could be in breach of international law.
[...snip...]
The US approaches are part of contingency planning over the nuclear standoff with Tehran, but British ministers have so far reacted coolly. They have pointed US officials to legal advice drafted by the attorney general's office which has been circulated to Downing Street, the Foreign Office and the Ministry of Defence.

This makes clear that Iran, which has consistently denied it has plans to develop a nuclear weapon, does not currently represent "a clear and present threat". Providing assistance to forces that could be involved in a pre-emptive strike would be a clear breach of international law, it states.

-- http://readersupportednews.org/news-section2/330-131/14193-britain-rejects-us-request-to-use-uk-bases-in-nuclear-standoff-with-iran

This is the Obama administration that Britain has just kicked in the teeth publicly over its determination to expand its sanctions attack on the Iranian population into a full fledged hot war.

This is not a Romney administration doing this, which would be far worse than Obama attacking Iran, because if Romney is elected Obama supporters will have to spend years pretending all over again to be opposed to Obama's right wing/neocon foreign policies.
 
 
-8 # Antemedius 2012-11-02 08:04
When you vote for someone you are approving their actions, and that is how they take it. The people who refuse to vote for either of these two right wing neocon con artists next week won't be having to make excuses or defend themselves for having voted for someone they knew would screw them.

People who legitimize the two party scam by voting for either of these two guys next week will be the people who will bear the responsibility for what they've done to their country - and to people in other countries, not the people who refused to approve it.
 
 
-6 # aaheart 2012-11-02 10:47
Well said, Antemedius, but the party trolls have done their job on your numbers. Some people choose a tyranny of the left instead of a tyranny of the right...as though under Stalin or Hitler things were wonderfully free. Thanks for your clear head in the face of the jeering throng. Like Orwell said, In a time of universal deceit, telling the truth is a revolutionary act...
 
 
-8 # Antemedius 2012-11-02 12:00
Well, I imagine they wish they could make comments invisible with their downrates, but they can't, and I imagine that frustrates them no end.

I welcome their downrates. The more they downrate while avoiding addressing issues the deeper a hole they dig.

They've managed so far in almost 4 years to get obama up from his all time low approval of nearly 75% just after his inauguration to a stratospheric about 50% now giving him a slim chance in next weeks election.

You'd think the obama camp could find better and more effective shills, but having nothing positive to sell is a bit of a drag on things for them, and most of them don't seem to be able to understand what their problem really is, even though it's a common one.

When a salesman tries to tell you that you should buy his product and the best reason he can give you is that the other guys product is crap, he may be right about the other guys product, but it also means that salesman is deluding himself and hasn’t got anything to sell you that’s worth you buying from him.
 
 
-6 # Antemedius 2012-11-02 08:05
..........................................
A vote is a terrible thing to waste, they say. But exactly when are votes wasted? Are they thrown away when cast for the least of multiple evils. Are they squandered when cast for what people really need and want, even if that means a Democrat might not win? Are they lost when people with few or no good choices stay home? Or have voters already been robbed when the menu is limited to corporate-funde d Republicans vs. corporate-funde d Democrats?

[snip]

This is what Eugene Debs referred to a century ago, when he declared he would rather cast a meaningful vote for what did want, and not get it, than a fake and hollow one for what he didn't want, and get that.

And so, a hundred years later, the game is still the game. IF WE WANT OUR VOTES TO HAVE ANY MEANING, it's time to reject the fake choices between the two corporate parties. It's time to wise up, to grow up and like adults, to take a view longer than dessert, or the next two or three elections

How To Waste Your Vote In 2012, by Bruce A. Dixon, Managing Editor, Black Agenda Report, 01/18/2012

-- http://blackagendareport.com/content/how-waste-your-vote-2012
 
 
-7 # wantrealdemocracy 2012-11-02 08:06
Voting for the lesser evil is plain STUPID. You vote for evil you get it. There are other candidates on the ballot.
 
 
+11 # Robert B 2012-11-02 09:44
The rabid elephant is the only evil on the ballot, pal.
 
 
-9 # aaheart 2012-11-02 11:37
Blind fools can't see that waging undeclared wars is a violation of international law and therefore US law.

Or that extrajudicial assassination of foreign civilians is murder and a crime against humanity, a violation of international law and therefore US law. Obama has multiplied the use of drones over the Bush regime.

He has also murdered two Americans, one a 16 year old boy eating lunch by the side of the road in Yemen...without due process, without habeas corpus, without congressional approval...viol ations of the US Constitution, international lawm, and therefore US law.

Waging aggressive war by proxy in Syria is a violation of international law, UN Charter, and therefore US law.

How much blood do you want on your hands? How much evil can you tolerate? How much evil can you support? If you can bear even one crime against humanity you are a sociopath like the criminals you elect.
 
 
+3 # Cassandra2012 2012-11-03 12:15
so where were you when dimwit W barged into Iraq????
 
 
-10 # Antemedius 2012-11-02 11:50
................
This is the most important election ever, black America is told every two and four years. That's probably true if one's own status and political legitimacy are on the line, and for the black political class that's really what this election is all about. It's about their legitimacy. It's about their perks and set-asides, their TV shows and the government grants to their ministries. It's about their careers, and those of their hangers on and aspirants.

This election is not about black unemployment, officially at 14%, actually double that, and in the inner cities of Atlanta, Chicago and like places closer to 50% of young men including ex-prisoners, because no Democrat running at any level proposes to address that.
[...snip...]
This election is not about black child poverty, which is the highest it's been since Lyndon Johnson declared a war on poverty nearly fifty years ago, and it's certainly not about rolling back the prison state or reconsidering the drug war because no Democrat wants to talk about any of that either.

This election is not about pursuing a binding climate change treaty, about reining in Big Oil and Big Energy [...] While Democrats on the stump will admit humans have begun to hideously alter the global climate, Democrats in power DO nothing to slow it down.
................

by Bruce A. Dixon, Black Agenda Report
http://blackagendareport.com/content/really-most-important-election-ever-if-so-then-where-are-our-issues
 
 
-7 # Antemedius 2012-11-02 12:52
Many people say they will only vote for a "viable candidate", meaning they will not even consider good candidates offered by third parties, but will vote only for "evil", be it lesser or greater in their minds.

What they mean by "viable candidate" is a candidate who has enough wall street/mic money to steal the presidency from the American people.

By that common usage they have a "viable candidate" only in either Romney or Obama.

Many on the other hand, define "viable candidate" to mean a candidate who is not bought off and who will work for the American people rather than for financial/corpo rate backers.

====================
Perpetual war. Rampant unemployment and under-employmen t. Environmental degradation. Self-interested corporatists run amok.

The difficult times America now faces, though challenging, are hardly new.
[...snip...]
The New Progressive Alliance (NPA) will endorse only those candidates who publicly sign the Unified Progressive Platform, which combines the ideals of four present-day and two foundational Progressive organizations. Any candidate or elected official who fails to uphold these tenets will be just as publicly exposed as a fraud and will lose the Alliance's support.
====================
http://newprogs.org/unified-progressive-platform-ratified
 
 
-6 # Antemedius 2012-11-02 19:02
====================
The general membership of the New Progressive Alliance has voted to endorse each of 54 alternative party candidates in 23 states running for offices at the local, state, and national level.

These men and women, seeking seats ranging from school boards to sheriff to U.S. Congress (both houses) to the presidency - THREE for that last office alone! - are blazing the trial for the future of democracy in America. It is a trail very different than that which the Democratic and Republican parties take us down election after election, with the same predictable result: A disenfranchised working class and an ever-more enriched military-indust rial-Wall Street complex.

These candidates - listed below, with links to more information about each - have endorsed the Unified Progressive Platform, a clarion call for peace, people, and protecting the planet.
====================
http://newprogs.org/blog/2012/07/03/29-candidates-17-states-and-counting
 
 
-5 # davehaze 2012-11-02 16:12
There is only one way for the progressive left to reform the Democratic party: Refuse to vote for them and tell them and tell them off.

A vote for Obama just encourages them (too few exceptions)to continue their destructive behavior.

That might mean Romney becomes president. So then we'll just have to protest his behavior, and more than we have pushed-back against Obama. That's democracy, folks, demanding redress of grievances, not just voting in elections that are democraticly truncaced by the two parties and may be altered in the electronic machines by the Republicans anyway.

Neither party represents the people until the corporate elite are satisified and they are never satisfied.
 
 
+5 # genierae 2012-11-03 09:34
Either you're a Republican troll, or you really are in a haze. It is false equivalency to say that both parties are equally at fault for the mess we are in, it is just not so! For every error and misdeed on the left, there's at least a hundred on the right.
 
 
+2 # PrinceDarrell 2012-11-02 16:18
I doubt antemedius is very young. However.. I am going to be creating my own path to green energy, a better economy and world regardless of the outcome. Time for better homes, and better efficiency equipment, consumer standards, and millions of jobs fixing up our homes, and businesses I promise, there will be cases from Justice righting the racist prison industrial complex, and out of control police behavior because it is WAAY past time.. the Constitution will retake its place as I will be calling it out if I find my way barred by a department called justice. And you will hear my voice from sea to shining sea.

And yes.. I can see what you mean about Romneys performance being designed to lead us back to Obama. And yes, I wonder too. But not too much, not any more, the government is there to serve my ends, and the ends of the people and it will, because it must.
 
 
+6 # Kathymoi 2012-11-02 16:25
Dear Mr. Ash, I admire your courage in speaking plainly and honestly.
 
 
-5 # Antemedius 2012-11-02 17:10
====================
Not long ago, I attended a speech by Obama, along with thousands of his adoring cheerleaders formerly known as citizens. I asked him to stop killing people in Afghanistan, and the Secret Service asked me to leave.

But, just now, I got a phone call from the local Obama office... The young woman wanted to know if I would come help phone other people. I asked if she was familiar with the president's kill list and his policy of killing men, women, and children with drones. She said she knew nothing about that but "respected my opinion." She hung up. Objecting to presidential murder is now an opinion... If you don't object to presidential murder by Democrat, then you simply arrange not to know about it. Thus, in your opinion, it doesn't exist.
[...snip...]
If you try to think of something more evil than what we are now doing, you'll fail. Name your evil: destroying the earth's climate? President Barack Obama flew to Copenhagen to single-handedly derail any process for protecting the earth's atmosphere. The only way in which to fantasize about greater evil is quantitative, not qualitative. We could drop more bombs. We could starve more children. We could experiment on more prisoners. In fact, this is what Lesser Evilism amounts to. A Lesser Evilist today is not choosing less evil policies, but the same policies in what he or she hopes will be lesser amounts.
====================
http://antemedius.com/content/nothing-more-evil
 
 
-3 # engelbach 2012-11-03 04:57
Bravo for this post. I gave you a plus.

This Website is overrun with people who lack the ability to evaluate with an objective eye the faults of their leaders. They equate any deviation from worship as being in the enemy camp.

Labor Party 2016.
 
 
+3 # orwell, by george 2012-11-03 06:22
party loyalty trumps legality, morality.
truth is off the table.
the message of occupy swept under the table.
 
 
-5 # Antemedius 2012-11-03 06:35
It is, and they do, yes.

And perhaps the saddest part of it all is that it is their unwillingness or inability to address the issues that has caused the drop in support/approva l for Obama from nearly 75% just after his inauguration to about 50% now giving him only a slim chance in next weeks election, yet after 4 years still all they can think of is to demand support while offering no positives.

But they take their lead from Obama himself. His refusal to address climate change for one example.

His determination to slash social safety nets is another.

October 05, 2012...
....................
The remark in question came during last week's debate about fiscal issues on MSNBC's "Morning Joe." In an otherwise forgettable conversation, things became newsworthy when the conversation turned to Obama's position on Social Security reforms. At that point, the president's consigliere, David Axelrod, responded not with a clear position, but instead by trying to halt the conversation.

"I'll tell you what, when you get elected to the United States Senate and sit at that table, we'll have that discussion," he told the panel.

When pressed, Axelrod insisted that the election season meant no debate should proceed. "This is not the time, he said. "We're not going to have that discussion right now."


http://www.tahoedailytribune.com/article/20121005/ARCHIVES01/121009951/1024
....................
 
 
-7 # Antemedius 2012-11-03 06:53
All of the progressives and independents who got him elected in 2008 are blown away by him.
 

THE NEW STREAMLINED RSN LOGIN PROCESS: Register once, then login and you are ready to comment. All you need is a Username and a Password of your choosing and you are free to comment whenever you like! Welcome to the Reader Supported News community.

RSNRSN