GITMO??????

Commy wrote:

you know, i've stated my reasons for voting for obama plenty, and truth is i still don't regret that vote. it came down to a choice between 2 candidates. you can play the third party bullshit game all you want but they are never going to get elected without a fundamental changing of the way parties are financed. they are too much of a longshot and too much is a at stake., we gave the world W when we played that game, when we tried to get nader his 5%.

i learned what not to do when bush was re-elected, its too big. this is empire. what we do here affects the world. so fuck off if i'm wasting a vote on the working family party or the green party again, we have to face a reality.

that we trade a militant capitalist for a militant capitalist every 4 or 8 years. the structure is set/ voting does very little. try to find an example of significant social progress that didn't involve millions of people demanding it? just one fundamental shift in the way power operates, without general upheaval and popular protests and strikes. we're not changing anything fundamental with a vote. and I knew that going in.

so for me the choice was very simple. who did i want to unleash on the world? for all we know we'd be in Iran right now if McCain had been elected, or sanctioning some other third world country that is already struggling to feed its people.

and i'm not happy with how obama has been doing things. he's started out pretending he cared about he majority in the US and has now seems to be catering to the corporate elite. foreign polciy is typical. i'm disappointed in that. but i wasn't fooled.

and i dont' regret my vote. i would have regretted it if we tried to get another nader in and someone even worse got elected.

and i think we unleashed the right guy. who knows how much worse mccain would have been. we sure as hell wouldn't be having a healthcare debate or talking about closing gitmo. and iran seems to be out of the question for now.

very well said, commy

Pepe Silvia wrote:

TriumphantAngel wrote:

Commy wrote:

you know, i've stated my reasons for voting for obama plenty, and truth is i still don't regret that vote. it came down to a choice between 2 candidates. you can play the third party bullshit game all you want but they are never going to get elected without a fundamental changing of the way parties are financed. they are too much of a longshot and too much is a at stake., we gave the world W when we played that game, when we tried to get nader his 5%.

i learned what not to do when bush was re-elected, its too big. this is empire. what we do here affects the world. so fuck off if i'm wasting a vote on the working family party or the green party again, we have to face a reality.

that we trade a militant capitalist for a militant capitalist every 4 or 8 years. the structure is set/ voting does very little. try to find an example of significant social progress that didn't involve millions of people demanding it? just one fundamental shift in the way power operates, without general upheaval and popular protests and strikes. we're not changing anything fundamental with a vote. and I knew that going in.

so for me the choice was very simple. who did i want to unleash on the world? for all we know we'd be in Iran right now if McCain had been elected, or sanctioning some other third world country that is already struggling to feed its people.

and i'm not happy with how obama has been doing things. he's started out pretending he cared about he majority in the US and has now seems to be catering to the corporate elite. foreign polciy is typical. i'm disappointed in that. but i wasn't fooled.

and i dont' regret my vote. i would have regretted it if we tried to get another nader in and someone even worse got elected.

and i think we unleashed the right guy. who knows how much worse mccain would have been. we sure as hell wouldn't be having a healthcare debate or talking about closing gitmo. and iran seems to be out of the question for now.

great post commy. this mirrors my thoughts exactly.

with millions demanding it....if everyone who thought 'well, if i vote for someone outside the 2 parties the shit sandwich will win instead of the giant douche!!' voted for who they thought would push for change from the presidency then how many would be demanding it? millions?

you can play the third party bullshit game all you want but they are never going to get elected without a fundamental changing of the way parties are financed. they are too much of a longshot and too much is a at stake., we gave the world W when we played that game,

is that why W won? because of 3rd parties? really? it had nothing to do with Kerry being a shit candidate?

i'm wasting a vote on the working family party or the green party again, we have to face a reality.

i respect your right to trap yourself into keeping the corporate duopoly going, i just choose to not take a part in that anymore.

y to find an example of significant social progress that didn't involve millions of people demanding it?

you say it will take millions to demand change, so are you just waiting to be the millionth and 1 person and playing the game in the meantime while you wait?

we're not changing anything fundamental with a vote.

you can't have it both ways, you can't say voting doesn't change anything fundamental then say it's a waste to vote for a 3rd party, someone who actually reflects the actions, not empty words and hollow campaign promises every few years, you want to see made, 'i'm wasting a vote on the working family party or the green party again, we have to face a reality'. it's not gonna change much so why not? are you just waiting for the revolution to start? when is the time? won't you always be worried about that other guy getting into power? i'm going to vote for my conscience, FOR somebody, not AGAINST somebody.

i would have regretted it if we tried to get another nader in and someone even worse got elected.

that's your opinion, that's cool, i would regret helping the same worthless, ineffective, corrupt system run smoothly, i'm not going to vote in a box of fear, i'm going to vote for the person i think would DO something, not simply the slightly less shitty option. i'm not going to participate and be a cog in their crooked wheel, i don't need all these preconditions to vote for who i think would reflect my worldview, agree to disagree

Pepe Silva

What good is 'Voting your conscience for a real change', if the candidate you are supporting doesn't wage a serious campaign to begin with?? Nader had eight years, at least, to show that he is sincere and serious about what he says. He could have at least tried to start a movement, a party or an organization to promote the causes that he claims to represent. Where is it?

He says all the right things, and he talks about what we should do, but anyone can come out and say 'we should do this', but he never says how he would. The worst thing about Ralph Nader is that he has become irrelevant. He has done nothing to create a viable political alternative to the GOP and Dems, nor to build support for his positions among the electorate. His positions on the issues, no matter how good they sound, are useless because he has done nothing to achieve the power to implement them.

I've given the benefit of the doubt to Nader, and believed his intention of entering the election was primarily an attempt to structurally change the electoral process from a two-party system to a multi-candidate type of system, but the problem with Nader, and what makes it impossible to take his candidacy seriously, is that he himself puts forth the image that he just wants attention for being a spoiler rather than a serious candidate. For all the accolades he get's for his progressive views, what good are they if he doesn't even make them known? Maybe his real failing is not being able to gain himself any publicity unless he's making himself a last minute candidate for president OR coming out the day after the election making controversial comments.

Nader is like the guy on the street corner holding up the sign. It is his right to do so, but it doesn"t make him deserving of Presidency of the United States. Call me a cop out all you want, but i was not prepared to give one single vote away and risk another Bush. I'm not happy with everything Obama has done (or not done), far from it. If he continues to disappoint, then, the conversation in 4 years will be much different won't it.

Commy wrote:

Pepe Silvia wrote:

Commy wrote:

you know, i've stated my reasons for voting for obama plenty, and truth is i still don't regret that vote. it came down to a choice between 2 candidates. you can play the third party bullshit game all you want but they are never going to get elected without a fundamental changing of the way parties are financed. they are too much of a longshot and too much is a at stake., we gave the world W when we played that game, when we tried to get nader his 5%.

i learned what not to do when bush was re-elected, its too big. this is empire. what we do here affects the world. so fuck off if i'm wasting a vote on the working family party or the green party again, we have to face a reality.

that we trade a militant capitalist for a militant capitalist every 4 or 8 years. the structure is set/ voting does very little. try to find an example of significant social progress that didn't involve millions of people demanding it? just one fundamental shift in the way power operates, without general upheaval and popular protests and strikes. we're not changing anything fundamental with a vote. and I knew that going in.

so for me the choice was very simple. who did i want to unleash on the world? for all we know we'd be in Iran right now if McCain had been elected, or sanctioning some other third world country that is already struggling to feed its people.

and i'm not happy with how obama has been doing things. he's started out pretending he cared about he majority in the US and has now seems to be catering to the corporate elite. foreign polciy is typical. i'm disappointed in that. but i wasn't fooled.

and i dont' regret my vote. i would have regretted it if we tried to get another nader in and someone even worse got elected.

and i think we unleashed the right guy. who knows how much worse mccain would have been. we sure as hell wouldn't be having a healthcare debate or talking about closing gitmo. and iran seems to be out of the question for now.

with millions demanding it....if everyone who thought 'well, if i vote for someone outside the 2 parties the shit sandwich will win instead of the giant douche!!' voted for who they thought would push for change from the presidency then how many would be demanding it? millions?

you think we can change the system with a vote. i realize that is impossible,.

you can play the third party bullshit game all you want but they are never going to get elected without a fundamental changing of the way parties are financed. they are too much of a longshot and too much is a at stake., we gave the world W when we played that game,

is that why W won? because of 3rd parties? really? it had nothing to do with Kerry being a shit candidate?

being a shit candidate is almost a precondition for victory. and thanks to all the wasted nader votes we got bush, the worst of them all.

i'm not wasting a vote on the working family party or the green party again, we have to face a reality.

i respect your right to trap yourself into keeping the corporate duopoly going, i just choose to not take a part in that anymore.

but you are taking part in it. we got bush with your way, i'm done with it..


mass popular protest may be the only way we will see any significant progress.

y to find an example of significant social progress that didn't involve millions of people demanding it?

you say it will take millions to demand change, so are you just waiting to be the millionth and 1 person and playing the game in the meantime while you wait?

that's my point. your trying to use a corrupt system to bring about change, i'm saying we need more than people checking boxes.

we're not changing anything fundamental with a vote.

you can't have it both ways, you can't say voting doesn't change anything fundamental then say it's a waste to vote for a 3rd party, someone who actually reflects the actions, not empty words and hollow campaign promises every few years, you want to see made, 'i'm wasting a vote on the working family party or the green party again, we have to face a reality'. it's not gonna change much so why not? are you just waiting for the revolution to start? when is the time? won't you always be worried about that other guy getting into power? i'm going to vote for my conscience, FOR somebody, not AGAINST somebody.

your right its not wasting a vote. its actually much worse. we could get another bush if we keep trying your way, and another 700,000 dead, patriot act, homeland security, tax cuts for the wealthy, less social spending, etc etc.

i would have regretted it if we tried to get another nader in and someone even worse got elected.

that's your opinion, that's cool, i would regret helping the same worthless, ineffective, corrupt system run smoothly, i'm not going to vote in a box of fear, i'm going to vote for the person i think would DO something, not simply the slightly less shitty option. i'm not going to participate and be a cog in their crooked wheel, i don't need all these preconditions to vote for who i think would reflect my worldview, agree to disagree

you're vote got us bush in 2004. my vote didn't get us mccain in 2008. agree to disagree.

more Republicans voted for Nader than Democrats.....also, maybe if the Democrats actually put forth a good candidate instead of Kerry they would've had a chance.

ummm...we STILL have the patriot act, homeland security (who under Obama raided the hotel and homes of 2 people using twitter to say 'riot police are arresting people at this location' and seized their possesions), citizens are still being monitored, his cyber security partnership is more intrusive than Bush was, he supported the abuse of FISA by voting to make what happened legal and 2 wars going on, what has Obama done to change any of those things? so your reasoning is we'd have exactly what we have now, minus a few increases in social spending? Obama HAS increased some social spending but can you name some Bush policies he has overturned instead of continuing, even strengthening?? He's bombing Pakistan, he will escalate the war in Afghanistan, we're still in Iraq, he campaigned on 'any health care reform MUST have a public option' to now pushing for a more industry friendly option of giving them more business and no real control over prices while no longer supporting a public option, he does nothing as Israel violates international law, the Geneva Conventions, UN resolutions (in fact Clinton stood right next to their PM and all but defended their expansion of illegal settlements), his energy plan gave far more to the nuclear power industry and dirty, outdated technologies than looking for alternatives, his financial 'reform' is a joke, again giving in to the industry, he said if anyone had meetings with execs or lobbyists it wouldn't be done in secret like Cheney and Bush did but would broadcast them on CSPAN and the internet (then had secret closed door meetings with the health insurance and pharmaceutical industry and like Bush/Cheney, refuses to say who all he met with), his chief of staff is telling Congress 'vote for the war and IMF funding or we won't help you in your re-elections' (though, i suppose if they lost that re-election you would still blame anyone who voted 3rd party instead), he went back on his campaign promise to renegotiate NAFTA......

my vote did NOT get Bush into office, the Dems being spineless and running an ineffectual campaign with an asswipe of a candidate is what got Bush into office, not to mention all the voting irregularities like a couple thousand votes that got 'accidentally' erased in NC. you can't say this is how the system is then say it's someone outside the system causing it.

this reason seems like having 3 places to eat in your town, Taco Bell, Wendy's and a local place that has much better food but doesn't get their ads played as often because they don't have as much control as the corporations....you've tried food at all 3 places and actually prefer the local place but you see more people are going to Taco Bell and Wendy's, which you really don't like nearly as much, but hey, everyone else is eating there and at least Wendy's has a frosty so you give them your support instead which in time drives the local place out of business leaving you with 2 shitty options.....and then you turn around and blame the people who ate at the local place for Taco Bell being voted best in the city saying if only you ate at Wendy's!! ??

actually, i voted for Kucinich in '04, but regardless, if my vote for Kucinich in '04 is the reason we had Bush, which is pretty dishonest, why aren't you saying my vote for Nader this time around gave you Obama?? why does it only work 1 way but not the other?

soulsinging wrote:

Pepe Silvia wrote:

i'll agree with that, but i think part of it is they are embarrassed and feel foolish to have made all these claims about how Obama was going to end the wars and bring the troops home (and would be the most liberal president in history) and how they attacked anyone who thought different and they don't want to have to admit to being wrong

others are just purely partisan and will never admit to anything but instead find ways to justify it regardless, sadly this happens on both sides of the single corporate duopoly fence.

and others are probably giving Obama the benefit of the doubt and giving him some time before getting angry. i think when it gets to a full year in office more people will start wondering just when this change we can believe in is supposed to start happening.

it was sad during the campaign to see so many 'progressives' suddenly embrace things like the patriot act, NAFTA, nuclear energy....when they had railed against it for Bush's terms. just goes to show how some are more interested in being the king of the hill for a few years than any real progress

though, to be fair, i have seen some people who were pretty big Obama supporters voice their displeasure on the wars and other issues....but yeah, no more daily 'bring them the fuck home NOW' threads but then he's a hardcore Obama supporter so you really can't expect to see those threads anymore criticizing their guy

or there are those, like me, who actually paid attention during the campaign and knew that obama never said he was going to end the wars and so did not expect that he would. i voted for him anyway becos he seemed the better man on the other issues, since their war policies were almost indistinguishable.

i never said it was all inclusive, i was referring to the people who used to constantly post about the war and are now silent. i don't place Commy or you in that demographic, though you seem to want to place yourselves there, because i have seen you 2 complain about the war since January.

soulsinging wrote:

Pepe Silvia wrote:

you can't have it both ways, you can't say voting doesn't change anything fundamental then say it's a waste to vote for a 3rd party, someone who actually reflects the actions, not empty words and hollow campaign promises every few years, you want to see made, 'i'm wasting a vote on the working family party or the green party again, we have to face a reality'. it's not gonna change much so why not? are you just waiting for the revolution to start? when is the time? won't you always be worried about that other guy getting into power? i'm going to vote for my conscience, FOR somebody, not AGAINST somebody.

That's a bullshit argument. Someone who reflects the actions? That's easy to claim your third party candidate would do exactly what he said when none of them have ever actually been elected and had to put their money where their mouth is. I'd love to see Ralph Nader step into office and in 6 months have delivered on every campaign promise he made over republican congressional opposition, reluctant moderate dems, and a conservative supreme court. Nader wouldn't be able to accomplish shit and you're delusional if you think electing some random third party candidate would change anything. They'd still have to compromise becos this country is NOT homogeneic and there are a HUGE number of people in this country that wouldn't want those policies and would fight him on it. Say what you will about Obama, he understands that and is trying (too hard I'd say) to get us moving the right direction. But you can't change course 180 degrees in this country overnight and no third party is going to do a damn thing about that.

well. my vote in '04 went to Kucinich, who has DONE things to prove to me he would push for change. also, Nader has a long history of accomplishments, not just well worded speeches, to make me think he would actually be an agent of change and not just roll over to special interests like Obama does.

and yeah, it probably would be hard for him to get changes through Congress, but what would happen if millions put someone in that office only to see their local representatives holding back the change they want? hold them accountable! riot! something other than giving in and playing along.

you got Obama and guess what? you STILL have those people holding back any real change, so what's the point? saying at least i voted for the guy in power this time? no thanks, my morals are worth more than bragging rights. i'm not going to vote for someone i know is making empty promises and won't do much just because the other guy is a little worse. this is the same absurd line of thinking as when people say "Thanks god Gore wasn't in office when 9/11 happened!!" why? what would have been so different? you can't agree both are similar and nothing fundamental will change from either of the 2 parties then say it would be sooooo much worse if the other guy won. isn't that saying there IS a fundamental difference??

I will admit as a "right wing whacko" (my words), I hoped the entire time of the 2000 election that a few old "Reagan Democrats" would vote for Nader instead of algore.
Just like I believe the 1992 election was skewed by Ross Perot's invovlement. 57% of Perot's supporters made over $50k, typically conservative supporters.
I stick to my thought that Gitmo's swift closing has little to do with who is in the Oval Office. It's a messy sticky situation that doesn't have a warm and fuzzy ending like most Americans wish for. We have become an instant gratification society, and sorry folks this situation just doesn't end in that fashion.
Just like Obama hasn't had a massive troop withdrawl over night. I will give the Junior Senator credit, he is listening to the top military leaders that if we came home now, the insurgency follows us home and Iraq turns into a worse out of control mess.

soulsinging wrote:

[

I'm sure, in fact i know, that many do have the best of intentions... at least the civilian citizens; i doubt members of the adminitration do, unless they're a lil thick, cuz surely they know the drill ... but if only the ordinary americans would realize the fear the locals of a country experience when they have foreign soldiers parading through their streets... and mad bombs fallin all around their homes...

half your nation opposed Bush, and half of every 1st world nations pretty much opposes its leader, but that doesn't mean a bunch of foreign fuckers could come and set things right... and one might say well Bush (or another for that matter) never did to his own citizens what maybe Saddam did to his, but surely smart americans would know that being fed lies and bullshit and being ripped off n what not is just as brutal, if not more, than being physically persecuted... and the worst thing is that most of the time we're doing just fine... much like yourselves... living, working, fucking, studying, playing music, diggin Pearl Jam:) or none of the above and whatever else there is to do or to not do (of course that can;t be said for many in each part of every 3rd world country, but then that would just be utopian) and that's pretty much a fact... and then we see on TV, foreign leaders sayin we ain't got freedom and liberty and all that shit.. well we got it, so quit stressin... i've said it before that i've seen just as much 3rd world sufferin in the US and in other 1st world countries, as i have in so called 3rd world countries... and that's why i believe that as human beings we all go through the same struggles, joys, sorrows and therefore are able to relate, no matter where we're from... it's this goddamn world order that has us up in arms against each other

vedderman71 wrote:

accrosstheoceans, i appreciate your open frank opinion on this matter.
know that i ask this b/c i really do want your opinion, i'm not tryin to start some message board riot.
so does your country or it's citizens see the US or Al Qaeda as being the bigger threat or enemy or how ever you would like to put it?
again i appreciate your honesty...

that's a valid question which ain;t that simple however cuz nothin here is ... firstly screw Al Qaeda, because that is some world-militant organization, nowhere and everywhere apparently... Pakistanis could give a rats ass about it... I'll talk about the Taliaban which is much closer to home, but that'll still answer your question... here's a group which until very recently has never wrecked such havoc in the country.. they were confined to the tribal areas and other remote parts of the country... domestically we've had military takeovers (which we more than welcome cuz they're the only staright talikin moherfuckers around) and other political turmoil, in the form of rivalry between political parties, such as that of that feudal bitch Benazir Bhutto, fighting for power against others.... but when the Taliban recently actually took control an area called Swat (very beautiful region i might add) that hit home, cuz we've never been ruled by right wing religious parties... sure Pakistan consists partly of conservative society and partly not... but even the former don't like this shit...However, neither I nor the rest of the nation are blind to the causes of militancy... and that leads back to the US... it's pretty much a fact, that they did use Islamic militants to fuck with the Soviets and then chucked em... only, these are humans you're using, not machines, and therefore it backfired... simple as that...

so as to whom we see as worse enemies, foreign soldiers from a very different part of the world in every respect, (lifestyle, appearance, religion, and much more) will always be more unwelcome, then foreigners just across the border, or rather locals gone wild ... it's simply a case of which is the lesser of the two evils... i said it earlier, every occupied country has become a Gitmo; Gitmo Proper at least benefits from media attention...everywhere else the shit just gets swept under the dirty carpet... still it's not at all the case that we are willing to tolerate, let alone want, the Taliban ruling our country... all classes, the lower, the working, the middle, the upper and the feudal are pretty much together on this and that's why i genuinely believe that they won't be able to rule the country... but i gotta end by sayin, that what we hate MOST is the self righteousness of the US in selling it's way of life, cuz no one's buyin it...