How can Ed and others be so blind?

TDMize15

clark_kent wrote:

nader's a politician. have you heard about his stock portfolio? all those corporations he blasts, he owns stock in them. he's the only candidate unwilling to disclose his finances.

many politicians are liars. many of them are great people. the problem is people like you do not understand the nature of compromise. candidates can talk about their beliefs, and they can talk about what they feel is best for the country or what people want. but when you get in office, you can only do so much. this is a huge country and it is very slow to move or change. think about your high school or college. there are 400+ people in the house. how hard do you think it is to get a consensus on anything there?

obama's not perfect. neither is ralph nader. those people you look up to recognize, however, that obama is a promising candidate. yes, he is a centrist, but so was john kennedy. when the latter got into office he steadily shifted left as time went on. i see a lot of that in obama. he's a man who understands that america wants change, but only so much. he is a man with hope who is willing to move in small steps.

A refreshing bit of intelligence in a post...

fuck

clark_kent wrote:

the problem is, people like you are no different from christian fanatics or muslim terrorists. you view any compromise as something dirty and evil and wrong. any action that is not a hard line liberal stance cannot be considered at all.

ok, I'm done responding to you after this post.

like I said before, you're not asking me to compromise. I know what a compromise is. you're asking me to take a leap of faith.

Kann

radiohead33 wrote:

I cant think of many people I respect more than Uncle Bruce, Uncle Neil, Dylan, Ed, Bright Eyes, etc...

So basically they're blind because they disagree with you on who they will vote for? Not even who should be the next president (for all you know they love Nader but prefer to do the infamous "vote for the lesser evil"), but just who they want to vote for?

know1

I'm voting for T. Boone Pickens....


....just kidding, I'm not voting for any of those crooks and liars.

inmytree

Can You Say Octopus? wrote:

isnt perfect. But when he talks i feel like things can get better. I havent felt that way in years. I do not care that he is inexperienced with foreign relations, I do not care that he voted certain ways while in the senate, and I most certainly do not care about who his pastor is (or what his pastor believes). The man is intelligent, well spoken and able to think his way through problems. Those three things our current president lacks. If he makes smart decisions about who he surrounds himself with for his cabinet all of the concerns people have can be addressed.

I do care that our country heads in a new direction. I disagree in that although he is a politician, he has not had his hand in it for very long. I voted for nader in 2000 and regret it because he had good ideas, but absolutely no chance of getting enough votes to do anything about it. I voted for Kerry in 2004 purely out of my intense thick hatred of GWB.

I will vote for Obama in 2008 with my eyes firmlly entrenched on the future. If he does a shitty job, it has to better than where we are now.

I hate how people judge musicians and actors for having an opinion. if you dont like what they have to say...do not listen to them. They are entitled to their opinions. Saying that they are dumb is stupid because they are as passionate in what they believe as you are in disagreeing with them.

I love how political Eddie and Uncle Neil are in their lives. Its refreshing to see someone stand for something. Very few people are brave enough to actually stand for something they passionately believe in, especially musicians. Music is so generic now and having them spout their beliefs adds substance to their work. I saw CSNY on their Bash Bush tour, and it was awesome. They played thirty songs that included neil youngs album Living with War. Sure people bitched about the content, but when he played Rocking in the free world and Ohio people stopped and sang along. Those two hit songs are just as political as his album "Living with War".

Sorry to Ramble On...heading to bed

Cheers,
Adam

well stated...

polaris

it all boils down to one thing ... HOPE ... hope that america can be a better america ... hope that the last 8 years has taught the american public something ... the way the system works - you have but 2 choices ... people aren't interested in getting mired in the details - they want to hear that things will change ... for the better ... and at this stage - that is good enough ... it is far better to vote for someone you think can win and potentially do good then vote for someone who can't win - that is why I think many are voting for obama ...

MattyJoe

I like how people just throw the word change around, but really they don't even know what it is Obama wants to change. His change would bring a period of dearth to the economy. That guy truly knows nothing when it comes to economics. He said a while ago something like the economy is doing so bad we've just "gotta be" in a recession, "we've just gotta be!"

DUMBASS.

inmytree

MattyJoe wrote:

I like how people just throw the word change around, but really they don't even know what it is Obama wants to change. His change would bring a period of dearth to the economy. That guy truly knows nothing when it comes to economics. He said a while ago something like the economy is doing so bad we've just "gotta be" in a recession, "we've just gotta be!"

DUMBASS.

so, who should we vote for...?

clark_kent

angelica wrote:

This is very true. In the west we pay a lot of lip service to intellect and logic, while we mostly blindly operate from unconscious emotional positions. Politicians (and advertisers) know this and opportunistically milk this.

This is why people are often unable to logically justify Obama responses, and why they deny and justify what cannot be denied and justified. Unconsciousness...

It's the norm.

i didn't mean it like that actually. you say it like it's a bad thing and utterly irrational to vote based on fear. it's not. i refer to the prisoner's dilemma, a very simple concept.

the fact is, maybe we all do want free health care. the flip side is, we fear candidate b is not serious enough about national security and that scares us. there is not illogical, denying, or unjustified it balancing those concerns. fear is not ipso facto an unconscious, irrational response.

IAmMyself

clark_kent wrote:

that was me. apparently you've never heard of a tongue in cheek response. my point was the situation is far too deep and complex for nader to walk over to jerusalem and ask for peace talks and have everyone go home happy and skipping over rainbows while they sing together.

and i am big on dissent. i've been dissenting from dubya since day one. hell, i campaigned for nader in 2000. dissent is a necessary corollary of compromise. people starting from different positions and working towards agreement. the problem is, people like you are no different from christian fanatics or muslim terrorists. you view any compromise as something dirty and evil and wrong. any action that is not a hard line liberal stance cannot be considered at all.

I would absolutely love to set down and have a conversation with you someday. It is extremely refreshing to read points by someone who actually knows what they are talking about, imo.

Not just this post, but every post you wrote, just kept putting a bigger smile on my face. Thanks! I agree with everything you've said, and I hope I read many more posts from you!
I hope you keep the passion, because you have the words to be able to open people's minds.

clark_kent

irieinindy wrote:

I would absolutely love to set down and have a conversation with you someday. It is extremely refreshing to read points by someone who actually knows what they are talking about, imo.

Not just this post, but every post you wrote, just kept putting a bigger smile on my face. Thanks! I agree with everything you've said, and I hope I read many more posts from you!
I hope you keep the passion, because you have the words to be able to open people's minds.

thanks! now just be sure to vote for me when i run in 2032

IAmMyself

That was actually going to be the end of my post, and I'm serious.
Have you ever thought about running for office?

clark_kent

irieinindy wrote:

That was actually going to be the end of my post, and I'm serious.
Have you ever thought about running for office?

i have, but i've got to figure out where i want to live and build my career first and then get involved and make some connections. i'm from ohio originally and there's a powerful draw to working my way up through the ranks in a swing state on the flipside, it's kind of a boring place, hehe.

plus, i've got a fair share of skeletons in the closet. i wasn't always as level headed as i am now. lived a pretty crazy life for a long time. got to figure out how to handle that in the campaign!

angelica

clark_kent wrote:

i didn't mean it like that actually. you say it like it's a bad thing and utterly irrational to vote based on fear. it's not. i refer to the prisoner's dilemma, a very simple concept.

the fact is, maybe we all do want free health care. the flip side is, we fear candidate b is not serious enough about national security and that scares us. there is not illogical, denying, or unjustified it balancing those concerns. fear is not ipso facto an unconscious, irrational response.

I was adding to what you were saying with what I see.

I'm a great believer in using our emotional intelligences to our benefit in a balanced way.

And as I said, unfortunately, people can't muster up logic that makes sense half the time. They don't integrate the fear with logic.

They therefore act on their fear .... fearfully. They make fear choices. Or they've shown me their choices are emotional choices in other avenues, without the logic to balance it out. They show that their emotions distort their thought processes.

This doesn't surprise me. Again, the vast majority is essentially unconscious, and operating reactively, rather than with discernment. It's where we are in our evolution.

fuck

angelica wrote:

I was adding to what you were saying with what I see.

I'm a great believer in using our emotional intelligences to our benefit in a balanced way.

And as I said, unfortunately, people can't muster up logic that makes sense half the time. They don't integrate the fear with logic.

They therefore act on their fear .... fearfully. They make fear choices. Or they've shown me their choices are emotional choices in other avenues, without the logic to balance it out. They show that their emotions distort their thought processes.

This doesn't surprise me. Again, the vast majority is essentially unconscious, and operating reactively, rather than with discernment. It's where we are in our evolution.

exactly.

LikeAnOpeningBandForTheSun

maybe Obama is a liar, but i think they subscribe to the Abraham Lincoln school of thought on change, in that change happens incrementally via pragmatic moderation and willingness to compromise rather than thru self righteous and unyielding radicalism.

decides2dream

angelica wrote:

the vast majority is essentially unconscious, and operating reactively, rather than with discernment

certainly your opinion to hold...but in my eyes, far from the truth.



i find the first post in this thread rather reactive and not very 'conscious' of others and their thought process and decisions. i certainly don't believe most people behave and think in that manner. then again, i completely disagree with it's premise. although yes, i agree we are where we are in our evollution and that's that. thus why i also base my decisions and thoughts on where we are today and working towards the positive changes i would like to see in the future. change takes very small steps. it always has, especially on such a large scale.

inmytree

angelica wrote:

I was adding to what you were saying with what I see.

I'm a great believer in using our emotional intelligences to our benefit in a balanced way.

And as I said, unfortunately, people can't muster up logic that makes sense half the time. They don't integrate the fear with logic.

They therefore act on their fear .... fearfully. They make fear choices. Or they've shown me their choices are emotional choices in other avenues, without the logic to balance it out. They show that their emotions distort their thought processes.

This doesn't surprise me. Again, the vast majority is essentially unconscious, and operating reactively, rather than with discernment. It's where we are in our evolution.

but what if their logic makes sense to them, but not to you...does that mean they are wrong...?

and since emotions are part of the human condition, how does one take them out of the decision making process...? is it a bad thing to except that emotions are part of our make-up, thus act accordingly...?

angelica

_outlaw wrote:

exactly.

The problem is that it's business as usual for the politicians, who like advertisers, know how to appeal to and manipulate us based on our unconscious processes.

meme

MattyJoe wrote:

That guy truly knows nothing when it comes to economics. He said a while ago something like the economy is doing so bad we've just "gotta be" in a recession, "we've just gotta be!"

DUMBASS.

and that is wrong how?