Remind me again how Obama is a good candidate and probably our best shot at regaining some of the respect throughout the world; when in fact he has voted for and supported just about all the actions which have led to us to this point of disrespect and loathing, by the International community?
As well as pandering to all of the same Corporate and financial interests that have ruined this country.
His "change" agenda is so far-reaching, he's even changed the meaning of "good candidate".
Smokey Robinson constantly looks like he's trying to act natural after being accused of farting.
After Bush it's easy pickings for the right speaker.
The sad part is Bush was talking similarly, like no nation building, let's be friends etc.., then a couple week after getting elected he was dropping bombs in Iraq....prior to 9/11.
Would it be wise by to exact a higher level of scrutiny this time around?
...one could say perhaps to put it lightly.
apparently a feel good rally speech is still good enough for a lot of people despite a shaky voting record on civil liberties, and a hard line stance towards fighting "terrorism" when it comes to using lethal force. I guess a lot of people still want to stick it to the terrorists and win the fight against terrorism if push comes to shove.
Why engage masses of people towards using violence as a means if you;re pro peace??? Is it a toughness thing... macho ego? I'm not sure.
In any event, I'm wondering who has learned what, and from which lessons in the past...
It's not an overly compelling picture.
The problem is, the people cannot engage a higher level of scrutiny because they continue to look out of the same awareness that elected George Bush. Yes, they've changed their tune there, but only because consequences became so great they had no choice. They are generally at a level of learning from hard knocks, rather than learning from theory. People in general, as still not able to discern what is before them and thusly understand what they are doing to perpetuate the consequences they must live out. They continue to look through a split awareness. So, they can only elect someone who is truly representative of them. Despite the show and glamour. At this point, with split awareness, they will elect someone who can do great works, and also great evil.
Absolutely people are literally making choices because their mood is lifted. Because they are given hope. They are not concerned with the substance. They don't know what substance is, because they continue to focus on the ego, within, which only sees and understands surfaces. Such points have been clearly made how Obama is great because he can rally people...even though Hitler did the same. What really matters is what they are being rallied for and people on this board show they are not interested in entertaining that aspect beyond the shine. The truth is, the majority supports an us vs them mentality, and killing, and will continue to until they resolve their own inner splits. As long as they have a convenient scapegoat out in the world somewhere, and the support of their brothers and sisters alongside them, they feel very comfortable creating death and destruction on a wide scale. They justify it and do it willfully. With pride. So when it's time to pay the piper, they will accept their accountability even though they are oblvious to their role in their own consequences.
The key is that we can learn in theory, before having to pay such heavy consequences, and yet, as a whole, the US is not there yet, judging by what they continue to choose.
It's this kind of thing that indicates it is not a handful of leaders who are accountable. If the second (and to me, shocking) election of George Bush didn't illustrate it's the tribal US mindset itself that is accountable, I don't know what can. And it goes without saying that those wonderful, awake Americans who are outside such a mindset are accountable for what they perpetuate, whether it's a way based on understanding, resolution or what have you.
"The opposite of a fact is falsehood, but the opposite of one profound truth may very well be another profound truth." ~ Niels Bohr
Our standing in the world was largely and negatively impacted by our invasion of Iraq. Obama publically opposed that invasion, and the rest of the world tends to notice that sort of thing.
Yeah, he publically opposed that invasion in the terms of the words that come out of his mouth. Going back as far as 2002 his actions in terms of who he supported and backed; speaks of a different story.
Obama is real good at talking a big game. His actions contradict those words.
Our standing in the world was largely and negatively impacted by our invasion of Iraq. Obama publically opposed that invasion, and the rest of the world tends to notice that sort of thing.
and yet....
-he's managed to continually fund the invasion/war/occupation
-before the public was as against the war spoke of keeping a permanent presence in iraq to let "iran and syia know we're serious" and we can't leave until we defeat the insurgency and still will not leave iraq
-thinks it was a stupid war (but b/c we weren't done w/ afghanistan yet) yet he votes to confirm condi rice as sec of state. just seems odd if he thought we were mislead into the war why he'd give a promotion to one of the main deceivers?
go figure
standin above the crowd
he had a voice that was strong and loud and
i swallowed his facade cos i'm so
eager to identify with
someone above the crowd
someone who seemed to feel the same
someone prepared to lead the way
-he's managed to continually fund the invasion/war/occupation
-before the public was as against the war spoke of keeping a permanent presence in iraq to let "iran and syia know we're serious" and we can't leave until we defeat the insurgency and still will not leave iraq
-thinks it was a stupid war (but b/c we weren't done w/ afghanistan yet) yet he votes to confirm condi rice as sec of state. just seems odd if he thought we were mislead into the war why he'd give a promotion to one of the main deceivers?
go figure
maybe you can answer the question i posed to roland? i'm genuinely interested in a real answer.
Someone who has the balls to stand up to Israel when they talk about peace..for starters.
A combination of Ron Paul, Kucinich, or Nader or any of the three... would be LEAGUES above Obama...
.
Progress is not made by everyone joining some new fad,
and reveling in it's loyalty. It's made by forming coalitions
over specific principles, goals, and policies.
Someone who has the balls to stand up to Israel when they talk about peace..for starters.
A combination of Ron Paul, Kucinich, or Nader or any of the three... would be LEAGUES above Obama...
.
^^^^^^
standin above the crowd
he had a voice that was strong and loud and
i swallowed his facade cos i'm so
eager to identify with
someone above the crowd
someone who seemed to feel the same
someone prepared to lead the way
are there people who actually believe that Nader wouldn't make a good president? just look at his past records, with all the good he's done. take a look at all the plans he has set up that he would make sure to set in if he were elected president.
there aren't many honest politicians, but nader and kucinich are some of them.
His "change" agenda is so far-reaching, he's even changed the meaning of "good candidate".
you crack me up...
Progress is not made by everyone joining some new fad,
and reveling in it's loyalty. It's made by forming coalitions
over specific principles, goals, and policies.
Comments
His "change" agenda is so far-reaching, he's even changed the meaning of "good candidate".
Absolutely people are literally making choices because their mood is lifted. Because they are given hope. They are not concerned with the substance. They don't know what substance is, because they continue to focus on the ego, within, which only sees and understands surfaces. Such points have been clearly made how Obama is great because he can rally people...even though Hitler did the same. What really matters is what they are being rallied for and people on this board show they are not interested in entertaining that aspect beyond the shine. The truth is, the majority supports an us vs them mentality, and killing, and will continue to until they resolve their own inner splits. As long as they have a convenient scapegoat out in the world somewhere, and the support of their brothers and sisters alongside them, they feel very comfortable creating death and destruction on a wide scale. They justify it and do it willfully. With pride. So when it's time to pay the piper, they will accept their accountability even though they are oblvious to their role in their own consequences.
The key is that we can learn in theory, before having to pay such heavy consequences, and yet, as a whole, the US is not there yet, judging by what they continue to choose.
It's this kind of thing that indicates it is not a handful of leaders who are accountable. If the second (and to me, shocking) election of George Bush didn't illustrate it's the tribal US mindset itself that is accountable, I don't know what can. And it goes without saying that those wonderful, awake Americans who are outside such a mindset are accountable for what they perpetuate, whether it's a way based on understanding, resolution or what have you.
http://www.myspace.com/illuminatta
Rhinocerous Surprise '08!!!
Yeah, he publically opposed that invasion in the terms of the words that come out of his mouth. Going back as far as 2002 his actions in terms of who he supported and backed; speaks of a different story.
Obama is real good at talking a big game. His actions contradict those words.
and yet....
-he's managed to continually fund the invasion/war/occupation
-before the public was as against the war spoke of keeping a permanent presence in iraq to let "iran and syia know we're serious" and we can't leave until we defeat the insurgency and still will not leave iraq
-thinks it was a stupid war (but b/c we weren't done w/ afghanistan yet) yet he votes to confirm condi rice as sec of state. just seems odd if he thought we were mislead into the war why he'd give a promotion to one of the main deceivers?
go figure
he had a voice that was strong and loud and
i swallowed his facade cos i'm so
eager to identify with
someone above the crowd
someone who seemed to feel the same
someone prepared to lead the way
maybe you can answer the question i posed to roland? i'm genuinely interested in a real answer.
http://forums.pearljam.com/showpost.php?p=5457495&postcount=119
"Obama's main opponent in this election on November 4th (was) not John McCain, it (was) ignorance."~Michael Moore
"i'm feeling kinda righteous right now. with my badass motherfuckin' ukulele!"
~ed, 8/7
Someone who has the balls to stand up to Israel when they talk about peace..for starters.
A combination of Ron Paul, Kucinich, or Nader or any of the three... would be LEAGUES above Obama...
.
and reveling in it's loyalty. It's made by forming coalitions
over specific principles, goals, and policies.
http://i36.tinypic.com/66j31x.jpg
(\__/)
( o.O)
(")_(")
yes!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
what future political aspirations does obama have that ron paul, dennis kucinich or ralph nader have??
nader's running mate has more future aspirations than obama, i'd say
^^^^^^
he had a voice that was strong and loud and
i swallowed his facade cos i'm so
eager to identify with
someone above the crowd
someone who seemed to feel the same
someone prepared to lead the way
there aren't many honest politicians, but nader and kucinich are some of them.
you crack me up...
and reveling in it's loyalty. It's made by forming coalitions
over specific principles, goals, and policies.
http://i36.tinypic.com/66j31x.jpg
(\__/)
( o.O)
(")_(")
Likewise, good sir.