The 2012 "Election" thread

Moderators: Elvis, DrVolin, Jeff

Re: The 2012 "Election" thread

Postby Project Willow » Wed Oct 17, 2012 11:26 pm

Well JR, these are the days when folks like Jon Stewart qualify as serious commentators on the political mileau.
User avatar
Project Willow
 
Posts: 4798
Joined: Sat May 07, 2005 9:37 pm
Location: Seattle
Blog: View Blog (1)

eye heart alice (Egypt)

Postby IanEye » Thu Oct 18, 2012 12:09 am

"curiouser & curiouser" - Alice (Wonderland)

"binder & binder" - Willard (Romney)
User avatar
IanEye
 
Posts: 4865
Joined: Tue Jan 17, 2006 10:33 pm
Blog: View Blog (29)

Re: The 2012 "Election" thread

Postby JackRiddler » Thu Oct 18, 2012 1:26 am

Project Willow wrote:Well JR, these are the days when folks like Jon Stewart qualify as serious commentators on the political mileau.


Yes, but he isn't. Except within the set of Assholes On Network Television, where he is among a tiny handful who could even be placed into consideration as "the best."

That piece from the Onion is a whole 'nother level higher, however, and my remark was in earnest.
We meet at the borders of our being, we dream something of each others reality. - Harvey of R.I.

To Justice my maker from on high did incline:
I am by virtue of its might divine,
The highest Wisdom and the first Love.

TopSecret WallSt. Iraq & more
User avatar
JackRiddler
 
Posts: 16007
Joined: Wed Jan 02, 2008 2:59 pm
Location: New York City
Blog: View Blog (0)

Re: The 2012 "Election" thread

Postby Nordic » Thu Oct 18, 2012 1:41 am

For those curious about the existence of Obamabots, if it were possible for me to share my Facebook feed with you, you would be subjected to the incessant, bizarrely fan-boy (and girl) postings of a great many.
"He who wounds the ecosphere literally wounds God" -- Philip K. Dick
Nordic
 
Posts: 14230
Joined: Fri Nov 10, 2006 3:36 am
Location: California USA
Blog: View Blog (6)

Re: The 2012 "Election" thread

Postby Nordic » Thu Oct 18, 2012 1:44 am

JackRiddler wrote:
Project Willow wrote::lol:

http://www.theonion.com/articles/nation-tunes-in-to-see-which-sociopath-more-likabl,29946/

Nation Tunes In To See Which Sociopath More Likable This Time
OCTOBER 16, 2012 | ISSUE 48•42 | MORE NEWS


Satire? I fail to see any way in which this doesn't qualify as a highly observant, empirically accurate analytic text for a college-level political science course.



I agree wholeheartedly, which is why it's brilliant satire.
"He who wounds the ecosphere literally wounds God" -- Philip K. Dick
Nordic
 
Posts: 14230
Joined: Fri Nov 10, 2006 3:36 am
Location: California USA
Blog: View Blog (6)

Re: The 2012 "Election" thread

Postby ninakat » Thu Oct 18, 2012 2:43 am

Nothing More Evil
By David Swanson - Posted on 01 October 2012

A writer at the Atlantic named Conor Friedersdorf recently noted the level of evil many have been brought to support:

    "Tell certain liberals and progressives that you can't bring yourself to vote for a candidate who opposes gay rights, or who doesn't believe in Darwinian evolution, and they'll nod along. Say that you'd never vote for a politician caught using the 'n'-word, even if you agreed with him on more policy issues than his opponent, and the vast majority of left-leaning Americans would understand. But these same people cannot conceive of how anyone can discern Mitt Romney's flaws, which I've chronicled in the course of the campaign, and still not vote for Obama. Don't they see that Obama's transgressions are worse than any I've mentioned? I don't see how anyone who confronts Obama's record with clear eyes can enthusiastically support him. I do understand how they might concluded that he is the lesser of two evils, and back him reluctantly, but I'd have thought more people on the left would regard a sustained assault on civil liberties and the ongoing, needless killing of innocent kids as deal-breakers."

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. They had my name because I'd picked up a ticket to attend the speech. 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, and willingness to be aware of its existence is an appendage to the 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.

Some of my friends at this moment are in Pakistan apologizing to its government and its people for the endless murderous drone war fought there by our country. They're meeting with victims' families. They're speaking publicly in opposition to the crimes of our government. And my neighbors, living in some other universe, believe most fundamentally, not that one candidate will save us, not that the two parties are fundamentally opposed, not that a citizen's job is to vote, not that war is all right if it's meant well -- although they clearly believe all of those things -- but, most fundamentally, they believe that unpleasant facts should simply be avoided. So, in a spirit of afflicting the comfortable to comfort the afflicted, here are a few from recent days:

WAR IS A LIE

We know that in the past "defensive" wars have been intentionally launched by fraud or provocation. We know that many in our government want a war with Iran. We know that several years ago then-Vice President Dick Cheney proposed disguising U.S. ships as Iranian and attacking other U.S. ships with them. We know that then-President George W. Bush proposed disguising a plane as belonging to the United Nations, flying it low, and trying to get Iraq to shoot at it. We know that there was no Gulf of Tonkin incident, no evidence that Spain attacked the Maine, no doubt that the weapons and troops on board the Lusitania were public knowledge, no question that FDR worked hard to provoke an attack by Japan, and so on. And we know that Iran has not attacked another nation in centuries. So, it almost goes without saying that Washington warmongers are contemplating ways to get Iran to make the "first move." Assassinating scientists hasn't worked, blowing up buildings doesn't seem to do it, cyber-war isn't blossoming into real war, sanctions are not sanctioning armed resistance, and dubious accusations of Iranian terrorism aren't sticking. Exactly what do we have to do to get ourselves innocently attacked by the forces of evil?

The Israel Lobby to the rescue! Patrick Clawson, Director of Research at the Washington Institute Of Near East Policy, blurted out the following on video this week:

    "Crisis initiation is really tough. And it's very hard for me to see how the United States president can get us to war with Iran. . . . The traditional way America gets to war is what would be best for U.S. interests. Some people might think that Mr. Roosevelt wanted to get us into World War II . . . . You may recall, we had to wait for Pearl Harbor. Some people might think Mr. Wilson wanted to get us into World War I. You may recall that he had to wait for the Lusitania episode. Some people might think that Mr. Johnson wanted to send troops to Vietnam. You may recall he had to wait for the Gulf of Tonkin episode. We didn't go to war with Spain until the Maine exploded. And Mr. Lincoln did not feel he could call out the federal army until Fort Sumter was attacked, which is why he ordered the commander at Fort Sumter to do exactly that thing which the South Carolinians had said would cause an attack. So, if in fact the Iranians aren't going to compromise, it would be best if somebody else started the war. . . . I mentioned that explosion on August 17th. We could step up the pressure. I mean, look people, Iranian submarines periodically go down. Someday one of them might not come up. Who would know why? [LAUGHTER FROM AUDIENCE] . . . . We are in the game of using covert means against the Iranians. We could get nastier."

This is serious advocacy for manufacturing a "defensive" and "humanitarian" war. This is not a war critic or a Yes Men prankster. The position of most elected officials in Washington, including the President, fits well with this. That position includes the ultimatum that Iran must cease doing what U.S. National Intelligence Estimates say it is not doing, namely building nuclear weapons. The goal at the bottom of all of this is war. The purpose of the war is not related to any of the excuses for it. The purpose is something else entirely. But it's ugly, so it's easier not to look.

HUMAN EXPERIMENTATION

We often forget that war is the worst thing there is. Hence our government's shift in policy back to outsourcing a lot of the torture and insourcing the "cleaner" approach of assassination without torture. Hence, also, our common fantasy that war can be used to solve a problem that is somehow worse than war.

We also forget that torturing people can be crueler than experimenting on them. Torture has been given an acceptance in the United States during the past decade that "human experimentation" has not. So, we are still capable of a bit of shock when a story comes out like this one: During the 1950s and 1960s the U.S. Army sprayed zinc cadmium sulfide, apparently including radioactive particles, in poor neighborhoods in St. Louis and other cities, to test the results on the people who unknowingly breathed it.

At the end of World War II, the U.S. military's Operation Paperclip brought nearly 500 Nazi scientists to the United States to work on U.S. weaponry. Many view their influence on the nascent military industrial complex as critical to its sadistic and sociopathic tendencies ever since. In fairness to the Nazis, it's possible that they simply fit in well, serving the military of a nation with a long history of genocide, slavery, torture, and public deception.

I came across a member of Veterans For Peace this week who's been struggling many years as a result of experimental vaccines and drugs given to hundreds of thousands of U.S. soldiers during the Gulf War. We also learned this week that every prisoner in the Guantanamo death camp has been given experimental drugs without their knowledge or at least without their consent.

And then there's this: "Congressional Probe Reveals Cover-Up of 'Auschwitz-Like' Conditions at US-Funded Afghan Hospital":

    "A congressional investigation has revealed a top U.S. general in Afghanistan sought to stall an investigation into abuse at a U.S.-funded hospital in Kabul that kept patients in, quote, 'Auschwitz-like' conditions. Army whistleblowers revealed photographs taken in 2010 which show severely neglected, starving patients at Dawood Hospital, considered the crown jewel of the Afghan medical system, where the country's military personnel are treated. The photos show severely emaciated patients, some suffering from gangrene and maggot-infested wounds. For TV viewers of Democracy Now!, please be warned: these images are extremely graphic and may be disturbing."

NOTHING MORE EVIL

Here's what I'm trying to get at. 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.

That might be a rational calculation within a polling place. But living it prior to and after an election, apologizing and cheering for one of two teams, as if self-governance were a spectator sport, is nothing other than complicity in the most hideous forms of cruelty and murder. That complicity is insidious. Evil begins to look like something else, because the Lesser Evilist, within his or her own mind, comes to view the Lesser Evil forces as good, if not glorious, if not saintly.
User avatar
ninakat
 
Posts: 2904
Joined: Tue Nov 07, 2006 1:38 pm
Location: "Nothing he's got he really needs."
Blog: View Blog (0)

Re: The 2012 "Election" thread

Postby ninakat » Thu Oct 18, 2012 2:44 am

User avatar
ninakat
 
Posts: 2904
Joined: Tue Nov 07, 2006 1:38 pm
Location: "Nothing he's got he really needs."
Blog: View Blog (0)

Re: The 2012 "Election" thread

Postby ninakat » Thu Oct 18, 2012 2:49 am

Why This Black Man Is Watching the Debates, and Voting Green
Wed, 10/03/2012 - 15:14 — Bruce A. Dixon

I can't say I'm not mad at anybody. If being ripped off and lied to, and having murders committed in your name around the world don't make you mad, there's something wrong with you, and whatever is wrong with me, it's not that. I'll be watching tonight's presidential debates, but like most people, I already know what I'll do on November 6.

I won't vote Republican, because among other things, the GOP is the permanent party of white supremacy. Republicans are also the permanent party of Wall Street, the party of Big Agriculture, the party of Big Insurance, Big Oil, Big Real Estate, Big Pharma, of more nukes Republicans are the party of privatizers, jailers, charter schools and military contractors. Republicans started the 40 years war on drugs, and of course they remain the party of Empire and Permanent War. Republicans hate brown people and threaten to jail and deport as many as they possibly can.

Democrats on the other hand, are the permanent party of Wall Street. Democrats are the party of Big Agriculture, Big Insurance, Big Oil, Big Real Estate, Big Pharma and more nukes, more jails and continuing the 40 years war on drugs. Democrats are the party of more privatizations --- Corey Booker is trying to privatize the water in Newark New Jersey for instance.

Democrats are the party of military contractors and charter schools as well. When Obama Secretary of Education Arne Duncan ran the school system in Chicago he gave several high schools and even a middle school to the US military to run as their own charter schools. Obama's Race To The Top program bludgeons school districts around the country into closing public schools, firing teachers and replacing them with charters, and is lauded by Democrat big city mayors in places like Los Angeles, Chicago, and Philadelphia.

Unlike Republicans, Democrats often say they like brown people, and they get the lion's share of the Latino vote. But President Obama's words don't match his actions. Obama has deported more brown people in 3 years than the last three Republicans put together.

On the good side, this Democratic president, and many other Democrats even support gay marriage and the right to access birth control and abortions. And although Democratic congressional leaders, when they controlled the House during and after Katrina, refused to hold hearings on the disaster because they were afraid of looking too pro-black, Democrats are emphatically NOT the party of white supremacy. In fact all the black elected officials elected with majorities of actual black votes are Democrats.

So there are differences. But down here on the ground where people actually live, those differences don't amount to much. Both are war parties, parties of the rich, parties that want to privatize roads, water, public schools (that's what charters are about --- privatization!) parties that will continue the war on drugs and policies that feed our American prison state.

I grew up believing my vote meant something, that it was my voice. The people I called my teachers taught me to raise my voice against unjust wars and economic oppression, the same way I'd raise it against racism. Exchanging a few white faces in city halls, legislatures and the White House for black and brown ones isn't really such a big deal.

What passes for black political power nowadays isn't such a big deal to me because poverty rates are as high now as when a bygone Democratic president declared a war on poverty --- a project that failed because he spent all the money in a colonial war that killed millions in Vietnam, and climbing still higher. Prolonging the careers of black Democrats like Atlanta's Kasim Reed, Newark's Corey Booker, Philly's Mike Nutter or even of congressmen John Lewis and Jim Clyburn as they front for gentrifiers, charter schools, and power companies that build new nukes in the middle of poor black towns being poisoned by old ones is just not anything I want to do with my voice.

I can see why all the big preachers want black folks to vote Democratic. Most of them are part of, or aspiring parts of the black political class, the black misleadership class themselves. Many depend on so-called “faith based” funding to keep their ministries alive. The black church has been captured, and is a kind of “state religion” of the black political class, divorced from the lives of the class of black people who provide over 40% of the nation's prisoners.

I'm an old guy now, past sixty but not yet senior enough for Medicare, and I've been in the movement a long time. Younger people sometimes ask me what to do. After telling them not to respect their elders all that much --- we didn't respect them that much 45 years ago either --- the main thing I tell them is that movement leaders and participants back in the day had visions and horizons longer than the next election cycle or the one after that. They were prepared to fight whether they had allies in city hall, the legislature or the courts or not. Unlike today's NAACP and NAN, they developed agendas without the guidance of corporate funders and their recommended professionals.

We've proved we can elect as many Democrats as we want, all the way up the food chain without changing much here at the bottom. I know this well. I gave more than 20 years of my own life to electing better Democrats, helping Democrats run better campaigns, and registering more Democrat voters. I met Barack Obama 20 years ago on one of those gigs in Project VOTE Illinois, where he was state director and I was one of three field organizers who signed up 130,000 new voters and flogged them out to the polls that year. We elected Harold Washington, and a lot of state legislators and a few Congressional reps. The Democratic party will still let you work for it, but once in office, big money calls the shots. It's time to leave that house and build a new one.

It's an uncomfortable truth: the present US political system is largely people-proof and democracy-proof. The time and treasure we've sunk into supporting Democrats the last seventy years is gone. It's a horse we raised and watered and fed that somebody else has ridden off and it won't be back.


I still believe my voice and my vote mean something. Kwame Toure used to say the thing to do is find an organization you're in substantial agreement with and join it, or if it does not exist, start one and recruit your neighbors.

So I've joined the Georgia Green Party, and I'm recruiting those of my neighbors who still believes that unemployment and mass incarceration have to be addressed, that illegal wars and deportations must be stopped, that Wall Street must be reined in, and that gentrification and privatization have to be stopped. Most voters who call themselves Democrats, in fact millions of those voting for President Obama believe exactly these things already, but are substantially disinformed about what their elected officials actually DO.

I was at a demonstration in support of Chicago teachers Saturday, and some participants seemed to assume that the president was on their side, that maybe they could enlist figures like Rev. Al Sharpton to aid their struggle to mobilize people against the inroads of school privatizaters. It fell to me to tell them the bad news --- that Sharpton took a half million dollar bribe years ago to jump on the charter school bandwagon, that he toured the country with Newt Gingrich and Arne Duncan beating the bushes for high stakes testing and charters, and the administration is actually the enemy on this one.

Eventually they and many like them, if they want a party that stands up for what they believe, will have to become Greens. It's my job to make sure that happens.

So I'll watch the debates, sure. The crooks who run them won't let Jill Stein, the Green Party candidate on the same stage with the corporate candidates. So I'll watch Democracy Now's coverage, in which Jill Stein and another candidate in real time answer the same questions as they do. My colleague Glen Ford will be a guest at Occupy The Debates in Baltimore as well.

So yes, I'll watch. And I'll vote. But not for a Republican and not for a Democrat, not again. I'll vote like my voice means something. I won't be coerced into voting for a 100% evil Democrat just because the Republicans are 120% evil. I'm voting Green this year, and helping build a Green Party, right here in Georgia where I live.

Bruce A. Dixon is managing editor at Black Agenda Report, a state committee member of the GA Green Party, and a partner in a technology firm. He lives and works in Marietta GA, and can be reached at bruce.dixon(at)blackagendareport.com, or via this state's contact page.
User avatar
ninakat
 
Posts: 2904
Joined: Tue Nov 07, 2006 1:38 pm
Location: "Nothing he's got he really needs."
Blog: View Blog (0)

Re: The 2012 "Election" thread

Postby Project Willow » Thu Oct 18, 2012 1:33 pm

Nordic wrote:For those curious about the existence of Obamabots, if it were possible for me to share my Facebook feed with you, you would be subjected to the incessant, bizarrely fan-boy (and girl) postings of a great many.


That goes for me as well. I am currently debating a friend who is an anti-torture activist over her support for Obama. :shock:

De hopium is strong stuff.
User avatar
Project Willow
 
Posts: 4798
Joined: Sat May 07, 2005 9:37 pm
Location: Seattle
Blog: View Blog (1)

Re: The 2012 "Election" thread

Postby Laodicean » Thu Oct 18, 2012 1:35 pm

ninakat wrote:


User avatar
Laodicean
 
Posts: 3520
Joined: Wed Jan 27, 2010 9:39 pm
Blog: View Blog (16)

Re: The 2012 "Election" thread

Postby JackRiddler » Thu Oct 18, 2012 1:45 pm

Project Willow wrote:
Nordic wrote:For those curious about the existence of Obamabots, if it were possible for me to share my Facebook feed with you, you would be subjected to the incessant, bizarrely fan-boy (and girl) postings of a great many.


That goes for me as well. I am currently debating a friend who is an anti-torture activist over her support for Obama. :shock:

De hopium is strong stuff.


See, maybe she's not selectively stupid on this one point. Maybe she's not addicted to a drug or celebrity worship. Maybe she expects nothing from Obama per se, as I do not (except exactly what we got so far). Maybe she just understands what political weather conditions are slightly more conducive to her social and justice movement, and what political weather conditions are guaranteed to make that movement powerless.

Only a movement that mobilizes forceful protest over a long term ever gets anything changed in this country. No government ever gave anything up without demand, as Frederick Douglass would say. However, the context makes a difference. If the majority votes for the hypocrites who pretended to be against torture and then endorsed it, it means the majority is not as stone-cold ignorant as if they vote instead for the maniacs who endorsed it from the beginning and act aggrieved because anyone would ever complain. Again, you don't get a choice in this matter: It will be one or the other, whether or not you vote or vote for a third party.

The difference is not in who gets elected, but in the impact of the choice itself on the popular psychology of the electorate. It is also in which voting clientele gets encouraged and mobilized: right or left? I don't know how many times I have to make this point, which has been steadfastly ignored, or strawmanned into "support for Obama" (and hence "lesser evil" and hence "evil" and hence "equal responsibility for baby killing," which by the way is more true of taxpayers and urban car-drivers than it is of voters.)

.
We meet at the borders of our being, we dream something of each others reality. - Harvey of R.I.

To Justice my maker from on high did incline:
I am by virtue of its might divine,
The highest Wisdom and the first Love.

TopSecret WallSt. Iraq & more
User avatar
JackRiddler
 
Posts: 16007
Joined: Wed Jan 02, 2008 2:59 pm
Location: New York City
Blog: View Blog (0)

Re: The 2012 "Election" thread

Postby NeonLX » Thu Oct 18, 2012 2:14 pm

I hear ya, Jack.

I think you are making a lot of sense.

(though I don't know how much of a "victory" it is to convince a dimbulb like me) :wink
America is a fucked society because there is no room for essential human dignity. Its all about what you have, not who you are.--Joe Hillshoist
User avatar
NeonLX
 
Posts: 2293
Joined: Sat Aug 11, 2007 9:11 am
Location: Enemy Occupied Territory
Blog: View Blog (1)

Re: The 2012 "Election" thread

Postby Project Willow » Thu Oct 18, 2012 2:17 pm

JackRiddler wrote:See, maybe she's not selectively stupid on this one point. Maybe she's not addicted to a drug or celebrity worship. Maybe she expects nothing from Obama per se, as I do not (except exactly what we got so far). Maybe she just understands what political weather conditions are slightly more conducive to her social and justice movement, and what political weather conditions are guaranteed to make that movement powerless.


She's Canadian actually, and believes Obama intends to pull the whole thing down, and that he's just been thwarted so far by entrenched power. It is indeed a bit of the hopium. She's seen some of the ugliest of ugly human behavior, and witnessed the failed or nonexistent responses of local, national, and international institutions. I imagine she finds some small relief in her views on Obama.

JackRiddler wrote:Only a movement that mobilizes forceful protest over a long term ever gets anything changed in this country. No government ever gave anything up without demand, as Frederick Douglass would say. However, the context makes a difference. If the majority votes for the hypocrites who pretended to be against torture and then endorsed it, it means the majority is not as stone-cold ignorant as if they vote instead for the maniacs who endorsed it from the beginning and act aggrieved because anyone would ever complain. Again, you don't get a choice in this matter: It will be one or the other, whether or not you vote or vote for a third party.

The difference is not in who gets elected, but in the impact of the choice itself on the popular psychology of the electorate. It is also in which voting clientele gets encouraged and mobilized: right or left? I don't know how many times I have to make this point, which has been steadfastly ignored, or strawmanned into "support for Obama" (and hence "lesser evil" and hence "evil" and hence "equal responsibility for baby killing," which by the way is more true of taxpayers and urban car-drivers than it is of voters.)

.


Agree. That's why I'm voting Green. Given the high level of control being exercised over the public, it feels like it will be an act of civil disobedience.
User avatar
Project Willow
 
Posts: 4798
Joined: Sat May 07, 2005 9:37 pm
Location: Seattle
Blog: View Blog (1)

Re: The 2012 "Election" thread

Postby ninakat » Thu Oct 18, 2012 4:29 pm

.

Fuck Obamabots

Image
User avatar
ninakat
 
Posts: 2904
Joined: Tue Nov 07, 2006 1:38 pm
Location: "Nothing he's got he really needs."
Blog: View Blog (0)

Re: The 2012 "Election" thread

Postby JackRiddler » Thu Oct 18, 2012 11:53 pm

Now, who is that in the picture? This person you say is a "bot" who should be fucked?

Do you have any idea whether the caption to the picture makes a fair assessment of the woman in the picture?

In that picture, I see no sign of who she is. Or where she is. Or what she is doing. Or what she thinks. There are no visible slogans. Is she at a demonstration? A concert? Some park, just hanging out? How am I supposed to divine that she is a supporter of Obama? Is it the hair? The color of the windbreaker?

Her photo has been chosen, entirely because of her looks and dress, as someone's cliche image of the "hippie vegan." We are supposed to equate this category with the supposedly omnipresent "Obamabot." (It is no different than Linh Dinh's "antipasti tasters.") It is a right-wing cliche, riffing off of superficialities, and adapted into an object for the smarmy fake-radical left to mock.

Show me the concrete. Not someone's stereotypes.

PS - I seek my allies on the left, not the right. If many of my bothers and sisters among organized workers, youth, African Americans, immigrants, Latinos, liberals and progressives, feminists and women, peaceniks young and old, and others in the broad Democratic coalition have willed themselves into delusions about the phenomenon called "Obama," still I will look to them first for alliance, before I ever decide that the shop should be given over to the raging-blind right wing simply because the latter "mean what they say!"

.
We meet at the borders of our being, we dream something of each others reality. - Harvey of R.I.

To Justice my maker from on high did incline:
I am by virtue of its might divine,
The highest Wisdom and the first Love.

TopSecret WallSt. Iraq & more
User avatar
JackRiddler
 
Posts: 16007
Joined: Wed Jan 02, 2008 2:59 pm
Location: New York City
Blog: View Blog (0)
PreviousNext

Return to General Discussion

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 168 guests