Why I'll Never Support Interventionist Warmonger Obama

[marmot]

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?

No. All I'm saying is that by pretending not to participate you won't make a lick of a difference.

You may even be making it worse.

No one here is pretending not to participate.

In fact, my aim in declaring 'the emperor has no clothes' is to make a real difference, to prevent the worse, to dissolve the participatory illusion that American democracy has become.

Here's another metaphor: The tracks are laid and the train we're all on is barrelling toward a very steep precipice. And everybody's debating on who should replace the conductor. The solution is not to vote a new driver for the machine, but to stop the train altogether before it carries us to our death.

But if you've been equipped with the spectacles the machine has blinded you with, then off course you're gonna object to this metaphor. Because the spectacles show you a favorable future, that the tracks are laid toward a land flowing with milk and honey, not the steep precipice. I tell you: those lens you've been fitted with are rosy blinders superimposing messianic robes over very naked conductors.

Chooo! Choooooo! Chug along now!

[nomo]

That's all good and fine, but what I'd really like to know is, do you seriously believe that it doesn't matter at all who wins this election?

[Eldritch]

I really can't believe all of you care so much about making me vote for someone I really don't want to support.

If they can get YOU to do it, Elfismiles, maybe they'll be able to shore up their own flagging confidence.

Flagging confidence?

Actually, false hope disguised as pragmatism.

[nomo]

"Obama may do evil things, but McCain is SO MUCH worse! Therefore, support Obama."

What preposterous idiocy.

You know, I don't like it much either. But the way I see it, you'd have to be completely delusional to think that whatever activism you're involved in now will have the potential to change anything with McCain in power. Keep doing what you're doing, but for the love of all that's holy, don't give the republicans another four years to fuck us all over. Obama is no messiah. He's bought and paid for like the others, but he's not an insane old man singing "Bomb bomb Iran." To me, that counts for something.

[elfismiles]

"Obama may do evil things, but McCain is SO MUCH worse! Therefore, support Obama."

What preposterous idiocy.

You know, I don't like it much either. But the way I see it, you'd have to be completely delusional to think that whatever activism you're involved in now will have the potential to change anything with McCain in power. Keep doing what you're doing, but for the love of all that's holy, don't give the republicans another four years to fuck us all over. Obama is no messiah. He's bought and paid for like the others, but he's not an insane old man singing "Bomb bomb Iran." To me, that counts for something.

Yer right Nomo... he's singing BOMB BOMB AFGHANISTAN and the stupid DEMS are fucking cheering him on - or did you read my original post:

"Or should you believe Barack Obama who said a year ago 'we need to send two more combat battalions to Afghanistan.' <sheeple cheers> The fact of the matter is al-Qaeda and the Taleban, the people who actually attacked us on 911, they've regrouped in the mountains between Afghanistan and Pakistan, and they are plotting new attacks. And the chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff has echoed Barack's call for more troops. John McCain was wrong and Barack Obama was right. <sheeple cheers>" http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=09ugYiF5tSI

And tell me this ... how has supporting the DEMS changed ANYTHING at all pre or post 911?

edit: actually I really don't care to hear any more on this so ... flame away.

[marmot]

do you seriously believe that it doesn't matter at all who wins this election?

In terms of foreign policy and military action, No, it doesn't matter. In regards to domestic, social policies, Yes, it does matter. And that's the catch. Millions will vote for McCain just on the premise that he's Pro-Life. And Millions will vote for Obama cause he's got charisma, his image is more presidential, less stiff, and he can sink a three pointer, and he knows what's it like to be a minority. Or whatever issue matters to them; they pick the candidate who best fits their ideals.

You win, nomo! Forget my above posts---I was just messin' with you anyway.

I'll probably end up voting---for Ron Paul!

[ninakat]

He's bought and paid for like the others, but he's not an insane old man singing "Bomb bomb Iran." To me, that counts for something.

What about invade, invade Pakistan? Does that count for something?

(And, incidentally, Pakistan has more than 2 times the population of Iran and already has nuclear weapons.)

[professorpan]

For fuck's sake, people. Voting is a TOOL. It is not a pledge of your eternal soul, an absolute commitment to the individual you vote for, nor does it imply that you endorse or even like any aspects of a candidate.

It is one tool among many in your arsenal, and it can be a very important one, particularly if you live in a state where the race is tight. If not, it's not as important, and it makes sense to vote for anyone you'd like.

If you really think Obama is as bad, or worse, than McCain, you are not looking at the big picture. You're not considering the potential for a far-right Supreme Court (as compared2what? pointed out). You're not grasping the very real differences between the two men, their voting records, and their stated intentions.

If you want to get intentionally myopic, you can focus on one issue -- in chlamor's case, foreign policy -- and ignore the very real differences in their policies and records on the environment, civil rights, gay rights, women's issues, taxation, health care, abortion rights, etc.

And even if you DO want to focus solely on foreign policy -- ignoring the wide gulf between the candidates on other issues -- you should ponder the fact that Obama *voted* AGAINST the invasion of Iraq, argues FOR diplomacy with Iran and FOR stopping the development of new nuclear weapons. Just to name a few very important differences.

But maybe you think it's all bullshit, and the military policies of Obama would be no more enlightened than McCain's. If so, I'd like to ask this: Who would you rather have ascend to the most powerful office in the world -- a guy who TALKS about diplomacy and peaceful resolution of conflict, or a guy who openly JOKES about bombing innocent people in Iran?

There are stark and dramatic differences between the two men, their voting records, their stated goals, and their potential for further destruction of the U.S. and the biosphere. If you can't see that, you're willfully blind or you haven't done the research.

So, really, is it so fucking hard to use a tool at your disposal to give the one-fingered salute to the guy we KNOW will bring much more pain and misery? The guy who jokes about incinerating innocent human beings? They guy who wildly rattles sabers and doesn't even discuss the possibility of diplomacy in foreign affairs?

Voting for Obama doesn't mean you love the bastard. It doesn't mean you have to even like him. It doesn't mean you are betraying your principles. It just means you are using a tool to stop a far WORSE motherfucker from gaining power. It's a defensive action that in no way translates into endorsement of Obama. It's a pragmatic action, pure and simple.

I have ALWAYS voted defensively, since there has never been a candidate who I truly believed would represent my beliefs. Never. Voting is a tool that allows you to push back, even if it's just a tiny bit, against the truly repellent and blatantly evil arm of the plutocracy.

Stop thinking of voting as some kind of holy commitment to an individual who is a mirror image of yourself. It never has been. It is a tool that can be wielded to put someone in office, to take someone out, or, in this argument, to stop someone who wears his evil intentions proudly. You aren't surrendering your principles if you vote for someone you despise in order to stop someone who is an order of magnitude more despicable. You're just doing what you can with the choice available to you.

I'll gladly vote for McKinney in my safe, blue state if someone in a swing state defensively votes for Obama in my stead -- how's that for an offer?

And for the all the deluded folks out there who still believe there are no clear differences between Obama and McCain, perhaps I'll start a thread where we can put that bogus claim to the test. Because it's drivel.

[Eldritch]

For fuck's sake, people. Voting is a TOOL.

Yes it is.

And in this age of Diebold (and in this post 2000 and 2004 America), continued confidence in voting is a little like the persistent insistence on the "ole trusty screwdriver," when what's really needed is a hammer.

[Julia W]

"Obama may do evil things, but McCain is SO MUCH worse! Therefore, support Obama."

What preposterous idiocy.

You know, I don't like it much either. But the way I see it, you'd have to be completely delusional to think that whatever activism you're involved in now will have the potential to change anything with McCain in power. Keep doing what you're doing, but for the love of all that's holy, don't give the republicans another four years to fuck us all over. Obama is no messiah. He's bought and paid for like the others, but he's not an insane old man singing "Bomb bomb Iran." To me, that counts for something.

I don't know what exactly the PTBs plan is for this election, maybe they're still working it out. They may be going with an Obama presidency, it may work better with the coming economic doom?/ peak oil? ...?

Now on the other hand they may be going w/ McCain. And in that case, you may go to the booth and vote for Obama (if that's what you think is the right thing to do), but will your vote be counted that way?

From http://www.votefraud.org/big_fix_2004_hopsicker.htm
"....Tests performed and videotaped by candidate Susan Bernecker in New Orleans in 1994 demonstrated that votes she cast for herself were electronically recorded for her opponent. This test was repeated multiple times with the same result, thus confirming that the machine had been fraudulently altered to influence the outcome of the election...."

And if the election is stolen to put a Republican in office over a Democrat, and if it so important to instead have a Democrat in office- what do you think the DLC/candidate do about it? Past performance (2000 and 2004) shows very little. Have you seen American Blackout? You can rent it on Netflix if you have that. http://www.netflix.com/Search?v1=american+blackout

[marmot]

For fuck's sake, people. Voting is a TOOL.

Yes it is.

Sure it's a TOOL---a TOOL for maintaining the illusion of American Democracy for the people, by the people. A TOOL for soliciting cooperation in our own demise.

[justdrew]

Obama is not going to invade pakistan for fucks sake, I don't care what he's said, he's not that stupid. He's throwing red meat and using it as cover to try and prevent rethug attacks and stave off the 'weak on terrorism' mantra. When push comes to shove you'll see sensible policy and reasonable actions taken to deal with the matters there. Civil society groups in Pakistan need our help pushing out the right wing nut jobs and cleaning up the ISI just like we need to do a lot of work cleaning up the CIA and ending the shadow government in this country. Under Obama they'll get that.

There is an "islamic" terrorist element - they are working hand in glove with the bush administration. and need to be hunted and killed, just like the bush criminals. Obama will see to it that the worst fucks get what they have coming.

[Eldritch]

For fuck's sake, people. Voting is a TOOL.

Yes it is.

Sure it's a TOOL---a TOOL for maintaining the illusion of American Democracy for the people, by the people. A TOOL for soliciting cooperation in our own demise.

Marmot, I'm adding this post because the above quote appears without the second half of my remarks. I was agreeing with Pan about voting being a tool only to point out that it appears to be the WRONG tool for these times.

I agree with you.

[Eldritch]

Obama is not going to invade pakistan for fucks sake, I don't care what he's said…

Before, it didn't matter to some people what Obama DID—because, after all, they "knew" what his intentions really were.

Now, it doesn't seem to matter to some people what Obama SAYS—because, after all, they "know" what he really means by it.

I know of no way to predict future behavior, except through past performance—in both word and deed.

[compared2what?]

I really can't believe all of you care so much about making me vote for someone I really don't want to support.

I care about your freedom to support what you believe in, because I care about my own, and they're not separable.

I wasn't trying to make you vote for someone you don't support. And I'd fight anyone who tried to. I was trying to convey my belief that your vote means next to nothing as an act of support for the candidate. The President isn't really the holder of the powers he represents. Those are permanent, and your vote doesn't have any impact on them.

I'd argue that while withholding your vote is definitely a politically meaningful and effective tactic in the context of large-scale, organized opposition to that status quo, without that context, it's an act of personal self-expression not political self-expression, given that it has no political value, tactically or strategically. And I'd further argue that you definitely should be free to express yourself personally by not voting, as a matter of both personal and political principle.

But to me, a vote for Obama does have a considerable politically strategic value, although I don't support him. And I'm opting to prioritize political over personal, myself. Part of which entails making the best case I'm capable of making to whatever part of the electorate I can, just to make sure that when they choose freely whether to vote or not, they won't be disregarding something I view as important because they haven't considered it, but because it's not an important consideration to them.

So no pressure to make you support something you oppose is intended, and I hope none is felt.