Why I'll Never Support Interventionist Warmonger Obama

[Eldritch]

"Unless you support 'Nixon-Agnew,' the war-mongering Democrats will get back in! Because remember: every war in this century so far has been started by Democratic presidents! Only Nixon will end the war."

This was one form the stupid argument for supporting the alleged "lesser of two evils" took in 1968.

Forty years later, stupid arguments to manipulate people into supporting "the lesser of two evils" are still being made.

("But this time, they're really, really true!" )

[Jeff]

It's interesting that there are several folks on the RI board that involve themselves politically through the trashing of Obama.

And yet, they are silent about McCain.

Think about it.

It's a good observation. I think a good reason for that may be that McCain and the Republicans don't expect progressive/anti-war voters to fall in line behind them. Obama and the Democrats do, and hope to be judged on the strength of their electoral rhetoric rather than their enabling and complicit actions of recent years.

If I had a vote, I would give it to Cynthia McKinney, and vote Democratic down the ticket.

[chlamor]

A PRO-WAR RECORD

Then there’s the matter of his actual policy and political record. If Obama is such (as many “progressives” seem to need to believe) an “antiwar” candidate, why has he offered so much substantive policy support to the criminal occupation and the broader imperial “war on terror” of which Bush says O.I.F. is a part? Here are some highlights from a summary of Obama’s U.S. Senate voting record:

“1/26/05: Obama voted to confirm Condoleezza Rice for Secretary of State. Rice was largely responsible…for the deaths of hundreds of thousands of innocent victims in unnecessary wars...Roll call 2”

“2/01/05: Obama was part of a unanimous consent agreement not to filibuster the nomination of lawless torturer Alberto Gonzales as chief law enforcement officer of the United States (U.S. Attorney General).”

“2/15/05: Obama voted to confirm Michael Chertoff, a proponent of water-board torture... man behind the round-up of thousands of people of Middle-Eastern descent following 9/11. By Roll call 10.”

“4/21/05: Obama voted to make John ‘Death Squad’ Negroponte the National Intelligence Director. In Central America, John Negroponte was connected to death squads that murdered nuns and children in sizable quantities. He is suspected of instigating death squads while in Iraq, resulting in the current insurgency. Instead of calling for Negroponte's prosecution, Obama rewarded him by making him National Intelligence Director. Roll call 107”

“4/21/05: Obama voted for HR 1268, war appropriations in the amount of approximately $81 billion. Much of this funding went to Blackwater USA and Halliburton and disappeared. Roll call 109 ”

“7/01/05: Obama voted for H.R. 2419, termed ‘The Nuclear Bill’ by environmental and peace groups. It provided billions for nuclear weapons activities, including nuclear bunker buster bombs. It contains full funding for Yucca Mountain, a threat to food and water in California, Nevada, Arizona and states across America. Roll call 172 .”

“9/26/05 & 9/28/05: Obama failed and refused to place a hold on the nomination of John Roberts, a supporter of permanent detention of Americans without trial, and of torture and military tribunals for Guantanamo detainees.”

“10/07/05: Obama voted for HR2863, which appropriated $50 billion in new money for war. Roll call 2 .”

“11/15/05: Obama voted for continued war, again. Roll call 326 was the vote on the Defense Authorization Act (S1042) which kept the war and war profiteering alive, restricted the right of habeas corpus and encouraged terrorism. Pursuant to his pattern, Obama voted for this. .”

“12/21/05: Obama confirmed his support for war by voting for the Conference Report on the Defense Appropriations Act (HR 2863), Roll call 366, which provided more funding to Halliburton and Blackwater. ”

“5/2/06: Obama voted for money for more war by voting for cloture on HR 4939, the emergency funding to Halliburton, Blackwater and other war profiteers. Roll call 103 .”

“5/4/06: Obama, again, voted to adopt HR4939: emergency funding to war profiteers. Roll call 112 .”


“6/13/06: Obama voted to commend the armed services for a bombing that killed innocent people and children and reportedly resulted in the death of Abu Musab al-Zarqawi… Michael Berg, whose son was reportedly killed by al-Zarqawi, condemned the attack and expressed sorrow over the innocent people and children killed in the bombing that Obama commended. Roll call 168 .”

“6/15/06: Obama voted for the conference report on HR4939, a bill that gave warmongers more money to continue the killing and massacre of innocent people in Iraq and allows profiteers to collect more money for scamming the people of New Orleans. Roll Call 171 .”

“6/15/06: Obama, again, opposed withdrawal of the troops, by voting to table a motion to table a proposed amendment would have required the withdrawal of US. Armed Forces from Iraq and would have urged the convening of an Iraq summit (S Amdt 4269 to S. Amdt 4265 to S2766) Roll Call 174 ”

“6/22/06: Obama voted against withdrawing the troops by opposing the Kerry Amendment (S. Amdt 4442 to S 2766) to the National Defense Authorization Act. The amendment, which was rejected, would have brought our troops home. Roll Call 181 ”

“6/22/06: Obama voted for cloture (the last effective chance to stop) on the National Defense Authorization Act (S 2766), which provided massive amounts of funding to defense contractors to continue the killing in Iraq. Roll Call 183.”

“6/22/06: Obama again voted for continued war by voting to pass the National Defense Authorization Act (S 2766) for continued war funding. Roll Call 186 .

9/7/06: Obama voted to give more money to profiteers for more war (H..R. 5631). Roll Call 239 ”

“9/29/06: Obama voted vote for the conference report on more funding for war, HR 5631. Roll Call 261 .”

“11/16/06: Obama voted for nuclear proliferation in voting to pass HR 5682, a bill to exempt the United States-India Nuclear Proliferation Act from requirements of the Atomic Energy Act of 1954. Roll Call 270 .”

“12/06/06: Obama voted to confirm pro-war Robert M. Gates to be Secretary of Defense. Gates is a supporter of Bush's policies of pre-emptive war and conquest of foreign countries. Roll Call 272 ”

“Obama's voting record in 2007 establishes that he continues to be pro-war. On March 28, 2007 and March 29th, 2007, he voted for cloture and passage of a bill designed to give Bush over $120 billion to continue the occupation for years to come (with a suspendable time table) and inclusive of funding that could be used to launch a war with Iran. Roll calls 117 and 126 ...Obama's record shows a minimum of 20 major pro-war votes…”



In a November 2005 speech to the Council on Foreign Relations (CFR), Obama rejected Rep. John Murtha’s (D-Pa.) call for a rapid redeployment and any notion of a timetable for withdrawal. Obama advocated “a pragmatic solution to the real war we’re facing in Iraq” and made repeated references to the need to “defeat” the “insurgency.” This language meant continuation of the war (Ford and Gamble 2005).

Earlier that same year, Obama shamefully distanced himself from his fellow Senator Dick Durbin’s (D-IL) forthright criticism of U.S. torture practices at Guantanamo (Street 2005; Cockburn 2006).


And he still refuses to foreswear the use of first-strike nuclear weapons against Iran (Gerson 2007). As Kucinich pointed out during last night’s debate, this is what Obama’s comment that “all options are on the table” in regard to Iran really boils down to: the potential first black U.S. President is willing to seriously consider the launching of a thermonuclear attack on that country. Debate participant Mike Gravel (a left former U.S. Senator of Alaska)was thinking of that horrific possibility when said the following about the leading Democratic candidates (Obama included of course) last night: “these people scare me.”

<snip>

http://www.zmag.org/content/showarticle ... emID=12687

[elfismiles]

If by "not supporting" Obama you will hand the presidency to McCain, will you feel better?

<snip>

Is it a real choice? Let me offer my answer by way of an illustration:

Say we're all sentenced to death and our executioners allow us to vote on how we'll go. We get to choose between lethal injection, or hanging, or firing squad, or starvation, or the electric chair. Get my point? No matter what our vote, whether the outcome is fixed or not, we all die. Death is death no matter how its done...

[on edit: not to say our vote isn't important here, for i certainly would prefer to die by lethal injection than by hanging or starvation. see, there are painless and painful ways to die. no pain please.)

Thanks marmot ... I almost used that exact example.

[elfismiles]

Why I'll Never Support Interventionist Warmonger Obama nor any other War Party.

It's interesting that there are several folks on the RI board that involve themselves politically through the trashing of Obama.

And yet, they are silent about McCain.

Think about it.

Aw come on fm9! Most of the folks here are lefty / liberal leaning so they already know full well the problems with McCain.

I'm just tired of seeing people "throw away their votes" on a system that is so far gone as to be irrellevant - generally speaking. I'm not saying "don't vote", I'm saying "don't vote for the evil of two lessers."

And I involve myself politically in many more ways than simply participating in this forum community:

Have you helped pass Anit-PATRIOT-Act Resolutions
http://www.rigorousintuition.ca/board/v ... hp?t=19375

What about you?

Think about that.

i'm mad as hell and I'm not going to take this anymore
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xSoAj-Mf2Eo

[nomo]

To imply that voting is like choosing how you'd like to die is hysterical piffle.

If that's how you go about selecting metaphors, maybe we are all better off if you guys don't participate.

[marmot]

Thanks marmot...

sure thing elfi (may i call you elfi?)

[RocketMan]

It's a good observation. I think a good reason for that may be that McCain and the Republicans don't expect progressive/anti-war voters to fall in line behind them. Obama and the Democrats do, and hope to be judged on the strength of their electoral rhetoric rather than their enabling and complicit actions of recent years.

I was about to post something along these lines, except more plodding.

I daresay Obama is even more dangerous than McCain in some respects because of the messianic Change/Hope proselytizing. With McCain, everybody knows deep in their heart they'll get a morally compromised, rich, imperialistic, militaristic member of the establishment. With Obama, I'm worried about the Martin Luther King and JFK comparisons. MLK at least was WAY more dangerous than BHO and JFK, while aggressively hawkish during the campaign and early presidency, was coming around just as he was assassinated.

Then again, what do I know? I certainly Hope (tm) Obama will turn out to be like JFK. Without the whole, you know, assassination jazz.

[barracuda]

...i certainly would prefer to die by lethal injection than by hanging or starvation.

Not so fast...

In Missouri, a doctor who participated in dozens of executions was quoted recently as saying he was dyslexic and occasionally altered the amounts of anesthetic given.

A botched execution in Florida last year illustrated another way a lethal injection could go awry: Angel Nieves Diaz needed a rare second dose of chemicals -- and the execution took a half-hour, twice as long as normal -- after the needles were mistakenly pushed clear through his veins and into the flesh of his arm. That left chemical burns in his arm that opponents say probably caused him extreme pain.

During the process, Diaz appeared to grimace. But he did not specifically say he was suffering. And a state panel was unable to determine if Diaz had been properly sedated or if he felt pain.

There is no direct proof that inmates have suffered while undergoing lethal injection. After all, they don't live to tell about the experience.

But opponents of lethal injection often cite a 2005 study in the British medical journal The Lancet indicating that the anesthetic can wear off before an inmate dies. The study involved 49 U.S. executions. In 21 of the deaths, the study found, inmates were probably conscious when they received the final drug that stops the heart.

SO to continue your metaphor, maybe you don't want totally incompetent MF'ers to shoot you with killing drugs after all. Try drowning (in a sea of militarism and debt) instead.

[freemason9]

A PRO-WAR RECORD

Then there’s the matter of his actual policy and political record. If Obama is such (as many “progressives” seem to need to believe) an “antiwar” candidate, why has he offered so much substantive policy support to the criminal occupation and the broader imperial “war on terror” of which Bush says O.I.F. is a part? Here are some highlights from a summary of Obama’s U.S. Senate voting record:

“1/26/05: Obama voted to confirm Condoleezza Rice for Secretary of State. Rice was largely responsible…for the deaths of hundreds of thousands of innocent victims in unnecessary wars...Roll call 2”

“2/01/05: Obama was part of a unanimous consent agreement not to filibuster the nomination of lawless torturer Alberto Gonzales as chief law enforcement officer of the United States (U.S. Attorney General).”

“2/15/05: Obama voted to confirm Michael Chertoff, a proponent of water-board torture... man behind the round-up of thousands of people of Middle-Eastern descent following 9/11. By Roll call 10.”

“4/21/05: Obama voted to make John ‘Death Squad’ Negroponte the National Intelligence Director. In Central America, John Negroponte was connected to death squads that murdered nuns and children in sizable quantities. He is suspected of instigating death squads while in Iraq, resulting in the current insurgency. Instead of calling for Negroponte's prosecution, Obama rewarded him by making him National Intelligence Director. Roll call 107”

“4/21/05: Obama voted for HR 1268, war appropriations in the amount of approximately $81 billion. Much of this funding went to Blackwater USA and Halliburton and disappeared. Roll call 109 ”

“7/01/05: Obama voted for H.R. 2419, termed ‘The Nuclear Bill’ by environmental and peace groups. It provided billions for nuclear weapons activities, including nuclear bunker buster bombs. It contains full funding for Yucca Mountain, a threat to food and water in California, Nevada, Arizona and states across America. Roll call 172 .”

“9/26/05 & 9/28/05: Obama failed and refused to place a hold on the nomination of John Roberts, a supporter of permanent detention of Americans without trial, and of torture and military tribunals for Guantanamo detainees.”

“10/07/05: Obama voted for HR2863, which appropriated $50 billion in new money for war. Roll call 2 .”

“11/15/05: Obama voted for continued war, again. Roll call 326 was the vote on the Defense Authorization Act (S1042) which kept the war and war profiteering alive, restricted the right of habeas corpus and encouraged terrorism. Pursuant to his pattern, Obama voted for this. .”

“12/21/05: Obama confirmed his support for war by voting for the Conference Report on the Defense Appropriations Act (HR 2863), Roll call 366, which provided more funding to Halliburton and Blackwater. ”

“5/2/06: Obama voted for money for more war by voting for cloture on HR 4939, the emergency funding to Halliburton, Blackwater and other war profiteers. Roll call 103 .”

“5/4/06: Obama, again, voted to adopt HR4939: emergency funding to war profiteers. Roll call 112 .”


“6/13/06: Obama voted to commend the armed services for a bombing that killed innocent people and children and reportedly resulted in the death of Abu Musab al-Zarqawi… Michael Berg, whose son was reportedly killed by al-Zarqawi, condemned the attack and expressed sorrow over the innocent people and children killed in the bombing that Obama commended. Roll call 168 .”

“6/15/06: Obama voted for the conference report on HR4939, a bill that gave warmongers more money to continue the killing and massacre of innocent people in Iraq and allows profiteers to collect more money for scamming the people of New Orleans. Roll Call 171 .”

“6/15/06: Obama, again, opposed withdrawal of the troops, by voting to table a motion to table a proposed amendment would have required the withdrawal of US. Armed Forces from Iraq and would have urged the convening of an Iraq summit (S Amdt 4269 to S. Amdt 4265 to S2766) Roll Call 174 ”

“6/22/06: Obama voted against withdrawing the troops by opposing the Kerry Amendment (S. Amdt 4442 to S 2766) to the National Defense Authorization Act. The amendment, which was rejected, would have brought our troops home. Roll Call 181 ”

“6/22/06: Obama voted for cloture (the last effective chance to stop) on the National Defense Authorization Act (S 2766), which provided massive amounts of funding to defense contractors to continue the killing in Iraq. Roll Call 183.”

“6/22/06: Obama again voted for continued war by voting to pass the National Defense Authorization Act (S 2766) for continued war funding. Roll Call 186 .

9/7/06: Obama voted to give more money to profiteers for more war (H..R. 5631). Roll Call 239 ”

“9/29/06: Obama voted vote for the conference report on more funding for war, HR 5631. Roll Call 261 .”

“11/16/06: Obama voted for nuclear proliferation in voting to pass HR 5682, a bill to exempt the United States-India Nuclear Proliferation Act from requirements of the Atomic Energy Act of 1954. Roll Call 270 .”

“12/06/06: Obama voted to confirm pro-war Robert M. Gates to be Secretary of Defense. Gates is a supporter of Bush's policies of pre-emptive war and conquest of foreign countries. Roll Call 272 ”

“Obama's voting record in 2007 establishes that he continues to be pro-war. On March 28, 2007 and March 29th, 2007, he voted for cloture and passage of a bill designed to give Bush over $120 billion to continue the occupation for years to come (with a suspendable time table) and inclusive of funding that could be used to launch a war with Iran. Roll calls 117 and 126 ...Obama's record shows a minimum of 20 major pro-war votes…”



In a November 2005 speech to the Council on Foreign Relations (CFR), Obama rejected Rep. John Murtha’s (D-Pa.) call for a rapid redeployment and any notion of a timetable for withdrawal. Obama advocated “a pragmatic solution to the real war we’re facing in Iraq” and made repeated references to the need to “defeat” the “insurgency.” This language meant continuation of the war (Ford and Gamble 2005).

Earlier that same year, Obama shamefully distanced himself from his fellow Senator Dick Durbin’s (D-IL) forthright criticism of U.S. torture practices at Guantanamo (Street 2005; Cockburn 2006).


And he still refuses to foreswear the use of first-strike nuclear weapons against Iran (Gerson 2007). As Kucinich pointed out during last night’s debate, this is what Obama’s comment that “all options are on the table” in regard to Iran really boils down to: the potential first black U.S. President is willing to seriously consider the launching of a thermonuclear attack on that country. Debate participant Mike Gravel (a left former U.S. Senator of Alaska)was thinking of that horrific possibility when said the following about the leading Democratic candidates (Obama included of course) last night: “these people scare me.”

<snip>

http://www.zmag.org/content/showarticle ... emID=12687

You're right, chlamor. You win. We'd better do everything in our power to elect McCain.

[marmot]

To imply that voting is like choosing how you'd like to die is hysterical piffle.

If that's how you go about selecting metaphors, maybe we are all better off if you guys don't participate.

This is a thread about warmonging candidates, nomo. War is death. And it's a perfectly powerful metaphor to underscore the idea that just because you get a vote, doesn't, necessarily, make you free. It also illustrates that our given choice of candidates are (in regards to war) merely different means to the same end, regardless of their outward seeming and political rhetoric.

So now you're saying that those who don't align themselves with your appreciation of democracy shouldn't participate in it? Exclude those who don't subscribe to the status quo, the state-sponsored, consensus reality of America?

[freemason9]

It's a good observation. I think a good reason for that may be that McCain and the Republicans don't expect progressive/anti-war voters to fall in line behind them. Obama and the Democrats do, and hope to be judged on the strength of their electoral rhetoric rather than their enabling and complicit actions of recent years.

I was about to post something along these lines, except more plodding.

I daresay Obama is even more dangerous than McCain in some respects because of the messianic Change/Hope proselytizing. With McCain, everybody knows deep in their heart they'll get a morally compromised, rich, imperialistic, militaristic member of the establishment. With Obama, I'm worried about the Martin Luther King and JFK comparisons. MLK at least was WAY more dangerous than BHO and JFK, while aggressively hawkish during the campaign and early presidency, was coming around just as he was assassinated.

Then again, what do I know? I certainly Hope (tm) Obama will turn out to be like JFK. Without the whole, you know, assassination jazz.

. . . but you know as well as I that if MLK were running for prez today, you would designate him as the newest member of the "deep state" or a corporate mole.

Because for a few folks, political success means instant incrimination.

[Eldritch]

"McSame Lite: nearly all the destruction for your dollar, but with only half the guilt!"

[marmot]

maybe you don't want totally incompetent MF'ers to shoot you with killing drugs after all.

Ah! my teethy friend, I advocate for a humane execution... give me something like morphine and valium first before I'm injected with poison.

[Jeff]

Remember Logan's Run? Everything was great, until you turned 30. Then the state put you down. But most people could live with that, because there was Carousel. Sure, no one was ever "renewed," but there was always the hope that it would happen to you.

I'm reminded of Carousel every election cycle. ("I'm flying...!")

I think hope in Carousel has to pass, and the ride has to be virtually riderless, before things can change substantively for the better.

It won't win you many friends shouting it these days, but "Life Clocks are a lie! Carousel is a lie! There is no renewal!"




Carousel is the ultimate rite of despair and hope. As the ritual begins, the 30 year-old victims stand in the center of a giant auditorium-in-the-round, wearing white death masks, robes, and hoods, that make this ordered world look like a high-tech version of something out of the dark ages. They are then spun around on a circular moving floor until they float into the air. Still circling, but now suspended in mid-air, they move their limbs in a death ballet as they explode one at a time. Meanwhile, an audience of those who are not-yet 30 are packed into the stands, cheering and screaming with excitement "Renew! Renew!"

http://www.transparencynow.com/Logan/logpics2.htm