Forum Post: [DELETED]
Posted 13 years ago on Dec. 11, 2011, 12:16 p.m. EST by anonymous
()
This content is user submitted and not an official statement
[DELETED]
Public Forum
0 comments 4 days ago by agkaiser
3 comments 1 week ago by agkaiser
0 comments 2 weeks ago by agkaiser
1 comments 4 weeks ago by agkaiser
1 comments 1 month ago by agkaiser
4 comments 1 month ago by agkaiser
1 comments 1 month ago by agkaiser
0 comments 2 months ago by agkaiser
0 comments 3 months ago by agkaiser
11 comments 3 months ago by grapes
0 comments 3 months ago by agkaiser
0 comments 3 months ago by agkaiser
0 comments 3 months ago by agkaiser
0 comments 3 months ago by agkaiser
0 comments 4 months ago by agkaiser
2 comments 4 months ago by agkaiser
0 comments 4 months ago by agkaiser
1 comments 4 months ago by agkaiser
0 comments 4 months ago by agkaiser
1 comments 4 months ago by agkaiser
0 comments 5 months ago by agkaiser
1 comments 6 months ago by agkaiser
0 comments 6 months ago by factsrfun
7 comments 6 months ago by factsrfun
I am still waiting to hear what the GOP jobs plan is.
I am still waiting for the GOP to pass a bill to stop give tax breaks and incentives for sending jobs overseas
I am still waiting for the GOP to quit protecting the tax breaks of the 1%
I am really in a wait and see mode.
If the GOP doesn't say or do anything different than the last 8 years they ran the country, I won't be voting for them.
According to Alan Grayson, the GOP health care plan is
"don't get sick... and if you do... die quickly."
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-usmvYOPfco
I'm waiting for the plan to end the wars instead of starting new ones.
I'm waiting for the plan where democrats stop voting with republicans on the theft of our rights. 4th, 5th, and 6th amendments gone when it comes to the federal government. I'm waiting for when the democrats stop voting with the republicans on further deregulating the fraudulent financial system instead of putting up new ones to stop the fraud.
I'm waiting for democrats to back the best piece of legislation I've read in a while: HR 2990 the NEED Act. The only bill to take the power back from the banks and instill a process to fund REAL universal healthcare and create jobs by improving the education system and building roads and better cities. It's all a possibility if they would just support this bill and bring national attention to it. But instead both parties support the fraud and the biggest threat to our nations sovereignty, private "too big to fail" banks and credit rating agencies.
it's called the "walk it off Act."
That would be funny if it wasn't true.
What is their jobs plan. So far it looks like it is called "support for sending jobs to Communist China"
I don't know who I am voting for but I know it won't be the GOP
Jimmy Carter was the first president to give the Chinese the most favored nation trade status, back in 1980. Since then every president has renewed the contract, with little restriction. Every president has cried that a renewing of the agreement would be tied to chinas progress on its shabby record of human rights. Of course, this cry was smoke and mirrors. Cheap labor and higher profits, in an unregulated China is what every Greedy politician on Capitol hill wants. Democrat or republican makes no difference, as we can plainly see by the recent charges of insider trading leveled against Nancy Pelosi, on CBS 60 minutes. Nancy is not the only insider cheat, as many members of congress of both parties are involved.
How we got here is important. What is more important is what is happening now.
Pelosi a small symptom. I didn't know it until the 60 minutes report. The problem is none of them are breaking the law. They made this illegal practice legal for themselves. And you know they all are indebted to those that provide the inside information
So who are you going to vote for. Which crook?
I'll probably write in for Harry Reid. Or perhaps Richard Millhouse Nixon.
They are both dead.
So if democrats really believe in social security and medicare, then why are they pushing to extend the payroll tax cut?
The payroll tax (FICA) is the very thing that funds the social security and medicare programs.
Are democrats FOR or AGAINST social security and medicare???
Make up our minds for us, will ya?
I think you make a great point; however it flies over the head of many. Defunding SS is their objective! Don't drink the koolaid. It's been poisoned !!
more like get your own healthcare, i'm not paying for some drunk who gets liver problems (i know some legit need hc, but example because people will abuse system)
The GOP had the JOBS Act and the democrats helped them pass it and Obama signed it enthusiastically. This bill which is claimed to help create jobs, by both the d's and r's, takes away regulations put in place after the ENRON scandal which were created to protect investors. Yep it's just another bill for Wall Street frauds and doesn't actually create a single job.
The answer lies not in either Democrat or Republicans. Both are Corporatist Oligarchs.
The answers lies in going beyond representative government entirely and adopting Direct Democracy over the Internet .
i don't know about the internet, that shit is crazy easy to hack and manipulate. And not everyone has access to internet.
But otherwise, I like it.
Now you're talkin'!
COMMON SENSE 3.1
http://osixs.org/Rev2_menu_commonsense.aspx
Web killer is the code name for V2. V2 is a foundation technology that was built to take us beyond the World Wide Web to a more advanced environment.
http://osixs.org/V2_Menu_V2.aspx
well, i think i'm a common man, too, and i don't have nearly enough time available to consider every issue thoroughly, so my participation in a direct democracy would be superficial at best, and i suspect the same is true for a majority of us commoners, so if i'm right the elite would surely dominate the country just as much under your plan as now. that's why i prefer representative govt, but i admit making it work is not easy.
Would you define that for me. Is it something that could be a reality or is it just a thought?
Internet is a weird place. It is a widespread spectrum ranging from truth to nutjob conspiracies about reptilian theory and all the way to 2 girls 1 cup. I would not trust the internet as a legit way of democracy.
[Removed]
No one can stop jobs being sent overseas. The reason they do that is because they can make products cheaper, thus a lower bottom line, thus more profits. It's common sense.
Democrats have been in control of congress since 2007, wake up dummy
GOP jobs bill = lower taxes, eliminate welfare to compensate for revenue loss if any
Oh the right wing media's plan. Vote GOP
Simple Solutions for Simple Minds.
Just vote GOP.
Why didn't the GOP do this 2001-2008, must have slipped their mind.
Hmm maybe if they hadn't racked up all that debt and gave tax breaks for sending jobs to China --- oops never mind that was their jobs bill.
If you want lower taxes we need to eliminate the privatized federal reserve and restore the power of the constitution over the monetary system.
Did you know the same year the income tax came about was the same year the federal reserve became privatized? 1913.
The federal reserve recently created 7.7 trillion dollars out of thin air. That used to be the ability of the government before 1913. Now if we had that power we could have greatly reduced taxes, free education for all, and free health care for all. Standard and Poor's wouldn't exist anymore with their ability to downgrade credit because we wouldn't need to borrow money from the federal reserve anymore owed back at interest. In fact inflation would stop completely.
Look up HR 2990 The National Emergency Employment Defense Act of 2011
two unrelated things happened in 1913 just by coincidence. 16th amendment sent to states in 1909 ratified february 1913. all 3 1912 presidential candidates advocated income tax. federal reserve not created till december 1913.
a major motive for the progressive income tax was concentrated economic power of the super rich. the fed was created mainly as a response to the panic of 1907 and earlier panics.
everything you claim about lower taxes, free education, free health care, and the end of inflation is pure fantasy.
the 2 companies that later merged to form S&P both existed in 1906. it's impossible to know whether the existence of the fed (from 1913 on) had anything to do with their merger in 1941.
hr 2990: i'm really surprised dennis kucinich would advocate moving the fed into the treasury dept. it would politicize the process of monetary policy and hamstring the ability to respond to conditions. the idea that it would be more effective than the fed at stabilizing the money supply is highly speculative, at best.
i'm pretty sure he's right about infrastructure jobs, which would be appropriate fiscal policy actions by congress. the best way to get it done is to elect a dem majority and pressure them.
Proposals/plans often get introduced and don't go into effect or get decided on until much later. I'm just saying the same people that supported one are the same people that supported the other. In regards to the income tax and the federal reserve in 1913.
I completely disagree with what you said here, but I do agree with what you said about infrastructure.
"hr 2990: i'm really surprised dennis kucinich would advocate moving the fed into the treasury dept. it would politicize the process of monetary policy and hamstring the ability to respond to conditions. the idea that it would be more effective than the fed at stabilizing the money supply is highly speculative, at best."
Considering the fed is fucking us over and giving trillions to foreign banks, supporting a system that is stealing people's homes, creating massive debt for the government, devaluing our US dollar and much more... anything other than the current corrupt fucked system is better, especially when it's constitutional. Specifically when it would get rid of our country's debt and make it so we don't need to borrow money from the fed and China.
saying so don't make it so.
like i said to frogwithwings, you've got an overactive imagination.
I think you have an overactive imagination. Prove me wrong on point to point.
The federal reserve is extracting wealth and is also giving trillions to foreign banks without disclosing to whom the money is going to.
What did the federal reserve need our bailout for if they can just create 7.7 trillion dollars out of thin air? They use their fraudulent system.
the fed doesn't GIVE anything to anybody. they LEND. they'll collect interest from those foreign banks.
they didn't need our bailout. the bailout didn't go to the fed. what are you talking about?
.01 percent interest to their partners in crime.
Dennis Kucinich called them out for it.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oUpXDZFtEHw
I trust Dennis Kucinich more than I trust a guy named novadust on the internet.
where do you get .01%? if the fed lends by buying foreign debt, it gets the interest rate offered by the issuer. if it buys US treasuries, it's not lending, but it's not giving, either.
all we're seeing is a limited set of numbers. we don't see the reasoning behind the actions. if the fed is not acting in the public interest, why doesn't dennis prove it rather than propose a political solution?
dennis says the fed "grabbed" power from congress in 1913. was that before or after CONGRESS CREATED the fed? how was the alleged power grab anything other than congress delegating authority to an independent agency in order to make regulation of the money supply nonpartisan?
dennis says the NEED act will create millions of private sector jobs and "ensure that the money supply...is not inflationary or deflationary," by moving the fed into the treasury dept, creating a panel of experts to manage monetary policy, allowing banks to borrow from the treasury, etc.
the only part of his bill that will create jobs is the infrastructure section. that is fiscal policy, not monetary, and has nothing to do with reorganizing the fed. it's something congress could and should do now.
how will experts "ensure" an end to inflation?
what's the advantage of letting banks borrow from the treasury rather than from the fed? where will the treasury get the money to lend them?
how will a politically appointed expert "monetary authority" within the treasury dept be nonpartisan? how is it better than than having the current fed board of governors, each appointed to a 14 year term (by more than one president)?
yes, the 12 fed banks are privately owned, but monetary policy is controlled by the board of governors and the open market committee. the 12 banks send only 5 members to the open mkt comm. the 7 governors outvote them (when there are 7, which there might be if gop senators didn't block confirmation). would there still be regional reserve banks under the NEED act? who would own them? would the treasury have to buy back the investments of private banks in the system (amounting to 3% of their total capital)? who would pay for it all? you? me?
don't trust me. just answer my questions. teach me something.
First off let's all remember who prints the money - the Bureau of Printing and Engraving which is part of the Treasury. Allowing banks/credit unions to borrow money "actual dollars" directly from the Treasury - at cost - would create huge competition among banks/credit unions and the cost to Americans to borrow money would go way down. The banks/credit unions would charge interest and/or fees based on what income they needed to stay in business (salaries, expenses, overhead, etc...) instead of predetermined rates. In other words the market (competition) would decide what each bank/credit union charged as interest. What banks/credit unions do you think would thrive in such a situation? The small local ones of course as they can do "business" much cheaper than the larger ones. Local credit unions who are owned by the members and aren't beholden to a bunch of whining stockholders hungry for dividends would do better than banks. GO LOCAL - YEAH BUDDY!
.01% loans right here. Instead of accusing me of lying over and over again, even though I've backed it all up with facts, start googling it.
"Well, here is the short version. Remember that time that the Federal Reserve gave a $7.7 Trillion secret bailout to financial firms? They did so through the discount window, which allows banks to borrow from the Fed at 0.01% interest. As Jon states, 0.01% isn't below market value, that's free, and when you and I go to the bank we go through "the inexplicable fee window""
http://www.dailykos.com/story/2011/12/19/1046839/-Fed-Reserve-may-give-$1-Trillion-in-FREE-MONEY-to-bailout-Europe-Dont-tell-me-we-are-broke-anymore?via=sidebar
i should've known you wouldn't be able to answer my questions.
i guess the good news is the country's not broke....
Answer your own questions dick. That's what the internet is for. You've been wrong on all the shit you accuse me of lying about. Like the .01% loans
when did i accuse you of lying?
i notice when i search this page that you have a propensity for name calling that is not limited to saying someone lies. but you use the words "lie", "liar", and "lying" quite a bit.
them's fighting words.
if you say them to someone's face, you may get in trouble someday. doing it online is cheap, if not cowardly.
You're really good at taking things out of context. You accused me of lying in other posts in regards to the federal reserve, bailouts, and .01% interest rates for their buddy financial institutions. I told you I trust Dennis Kucinich more than some guy named novadust on the internet and I posted a video of his in regards to the statements I made where you accused me of lying. Turns out your accusation was false and I was telling the truth.
And the times when you search this post for how many times I call people "liars," ...It's from when I call Obama a liar and I call the GOP liars. Which they are and it's factually proven.
I call people liars to their face when they lie to me. I went to my congressman's office and told his staff they were lying to me and I brought in bill text to prove it. They were not fighting words. They were informative words.
YES! fed must DIE!
So vote for Obama and his minions. Everything will be wonderful then!
Got a better idea genius?
Please share some of your wisdumb!
[Removed]
Yes. Make cuts in massive government waste. Decentralize government to local level. Quit giving billions to corrupt foreign governments. Stop obligate spending. Your messiah obamma will do none of that. And you filthy leftists are a-okay with that. None of you care about future generations. Self absorbed Marxist shit.
And so who is your messiah "Lady Cleo"?
Who should this self absorbed Marxist vote for?
Any one but Marxist Obama!!!!
Third party: http://www.the99declaration.org/
Could be, I'm not crazy about Obama. Let's see what things look like next November.
I voted for Perot. That might give you a clue as to how I think.
Thanks for the link!
hey, i voted for nader. twice! but not the 3rd time: too much at stake, like now! you vote 3rd party or sit it out, you get gop.
Until you have an alternate candidate who could actually win, I'm voting for Obama.
Cool keep voting for George W Obama and keep expecting that change.
Do you have someone who could win? Perhaps by next election there will be someone, but I'm not taking chances on having some Christian right wing president.
If it were up to me I'd vote for Dennis Kucinich, but he's not running for president this time.
Sadly, I think Douche Gingirch is going to win. And then I will have to move to Canada.
Well, that's the problem and I worry the same. I'll be voting dem. Canada is too cold for me.
vancouver is very mild. a friend who does demographic studies actually said that many in the field are predicting emigration rates from the US could become significant. who would want to deal with having to pay for all that debt. already reportedly happening in greece.
pretty soon Canada will be saying, "those damn 'mericans took our jobs!!" hahaha
if you really plan to waste your vote, why wait? move to canada now!
withholding a vote fro obama just makes a RW victory more likely. if you think that's good, you must've slept thru the last 30 years.
Fuck Obama. He is a lying war monger who has bombed more countries than both Bush administrations combined and supports deleting the bill of rights. Fuck the GOP as well. Any vote for Obama/Newt/Romney is a fucking waste.
go ahead, move to canada. you'll love stephen harper. he's got a smirk like dubya.
I'm still banking on Ron PauI. Some polls put him in the lead for the Iowa caucus. But yeah if it's Newt, I'm moving to Canada. If Obama wins and there is any sort of outrageous activity in regards to the NDAA and declaring the entire world a battlefield, I'm out also.
so there's a good chance you'll leave? glad to hear it. i almost hope newt gets nominated so maybe you'll leave sooner. go out in the woods. get a canoe. paddle thru rapids.
Well guarantee no change with Newt or Romney ---maybe change for the worse. Better no change than Newt getting our kids to scrub public toilets after school
But George W. Obama DID bring change that I can REALLY believe in - CHANGE FOR THE WORSE, unfortunately.
I'd like to see what he can do once we get rid of the toothless hick tea party congress.
And imagine how much worse if that creepy Palin had been the VP. That was the dumbest decision of the Reps (thank God), as she was the tipping point for many who crossed party lines to vote dem.
No one is saying McCain and Palin would not have been worse. I'm just saying that the Obama administration sucks. The GOP and the DNP suck. They choose liars for us to vote for and it always comes down to the lesser of 2 evils. Well guess what? Both are still evil.
I'm still voting dem. Not going to have conservative Christian right wingers running my country. The gay bashing, anti-abortion, anti-evolutionaries make me siiiick. Until there is a better choice, no way am I letting that happen. Hopefully people will step up sometime soon who are truly honest public servants, but I do not want to lose any rights and have to vote - even if it is just against CCRWers.
I don't think there will be any good third party candidate this election, but I think if the momentum builds fast enough then maybe, MAYBE, we can get a candidate in the running for 2016.
I'm supporting the 99declaration. I am fairly certain that a strong third party with a real shot at winning elections will come from it: http://www.the99declaration.org/
Way to make a stand!!
You are part of the problem. Vote for the status quo.
For now, if the status quo is able to protect some of the rights we fought for, at least I will know my daughters will not lose their right to pro choice. If the alternative is sit back and let a Christian consertive right winger become Pres. yeah, sign me up for the status quo.
Then why do you complain about anything? Your children being able to get an abortion is the most important thing to you?
And my gay niece having equal rights and keeping evolution in text books etc etc. Yes, that stuff is very important to me.
Then you should be happy with the state of this country. You are lucky. Some of us here see things a little differently.
When you have a viable option, I'll be there at the polls. For now, I'll have to stick with holding on to the few rights I still have.
In other words the status quo. Okay.
The status quo is only a bad thing when change represents a net gain compared to how things are done now. Voting for the GOP as things stand right now would be endorsing a net loss compared to how things are now, and voting for anybody that doesn't have a chance of winning is refusing to condemn said net loss and thus tacitly endorsing it.
Voting for someone that doesn't have a chance to win is not contributing to the problem. All you people rationalizing about how the present status quo is better than blah blah have no right to bitch about the government. You are voting for those assholes in the White House and in Congress. YOU put them in there and YOU keep them in there. Quit bitching. You want what they are doing to just keep going. Bunch of fucking hypocrites.
It may not be contributing to the problem, but it certainly is very pointedly sitting around with your thumb up your ass rather than attempting to fix it. I prefer to vote Obama back in and then become a part of the 99% Declaration in an attempt to force Congress to clean up its act and start trying to fix this country. I'd also like to see real progressives run in the primaries of both parties in an attempt to remind Congress of its duty.
Good luck with that. You are deluded.
Well, what would you have me do then? Not vote and just let election season pass me by? Vote for somebody who doesn't have a chance of winning and proactively throw away my vote? Vote for someone who's going to make Obama look like a pot-smoking global socialist kumbaya guy by comparison? If the actual solution were as easy as all that then given the abysmal voter turnout rates and the prevalence of right-wing idiocy in this country we would have solved all our problems by now.
As I said before, sure will, as that term doesn't make me feel bad/guilt tripped about voting Democrat at this point.
and that makes u apart of the problem. Ron Paul will FIX the economy
<yawn> Another Ron Lawl fanboy ...
RonPaul on the Issues:
Total free market capitalism.
Free market health care.
Repeal Roe v. Wade.
Eliminate capital gains and estate taxes.
Eliminate the EPA.
Repeal ban on assault weapons.
Undermine UN arms control efforts.
Go to his website and read it for yourself.
Thats what im all about. I own assault weapons oh no I must be a crazy person. lol u east coast pussys. the feds should not be our masters. it is the people who have the power. and screw the un. u want a president who takes his orders from a global body? lol the epa is the modern say gustapo. and yes if we had total free market captalism and we ended the fed. we would have a great economy. why do u think we were once the most wealthy country in the world>? FREE MARKET CAPTALISM
Ron Lawl hasn't a chance in hell. And this Paul thing on here is very juvenile. Who's running this site, a bunch of merry pranksters?
so go ahead and support a president that got more money from wall street than anyother in modern history and then bailed them all out. YAY I LOVE BEING A TOOL
As I told the other poster, being a tool, status quo, whatever, that doesn't make me feel anything. Okay, I'm a tool. I'm not losing any rights to reps.
I don't mean talk of him, but changing the spelling.
you know what?
when you go here:
I tune you out.
Do you know why?
I'll tell you why.
the ones who first claimed that Obama's actions in Libya were unconstitutional were repelicans playing for political leverage
Gadhafi was on the brink of wiping out Misrata - and everyone in Misrata. I'm sure very few would have survived.
Why is it you stand with Egyptions, and not with Libyans? I do not understand.
The British and the French were going to respond anyway. They had to, because of the wave of refugees leaving Libya and sailing to Europe. The repelicans wanted to take the lead - and never mind who's gonna pay for it.
grandma will pay for it with the social security checks she won't get.
Since the Brits and French were going in anyway - working within NATO we provided intel with drones, that was our principle function. It may have saved lives - providing more accuracy in targeting the battlefield.
al-Qaida?
what? are we supposed to believe that they are in the process of taking over? Possible I guess - doesn't seem likely - the reports I had heard were mixed on that, but it could be true.
I don't think the Libyans are likely going to appreciate trading one dictator for another. Hopefully they can sort that shit out.
but when you start crying that we had any involvement in Libya, that it was a crime, that it was wrong -
then I say you stand in silent acceptance of every victim in every mass grave Gadhafi dug.
I don't have any respect for that position. that fucking guy was a mass murderer - the people rose up and asked for our assistance.
without it they would all have been slain.
Do you get that?
without it they would all have been slain.
"but when you start crying that we had any involvement in Libya, that it was a crime, that it was wrong - then I say you stand in silent acceptance of every victim in every mass grave Gadhafi dug."
You realize this is the same argument the neocons and others used to discredit any one who criticized the Iraq war. If you were against the Iraq war, you were Ok with Saddam slaughtering his own people.
Why would you assume that the intervention was legal? It was carried out for months without congressional approval, thus it was illegal. Obamas own attorney general, his office of legal council chief and his DOD general council all argued that it was illegal.
The way they got around the law(the war powers resolution) was by claiming the militaries activities fell short of "hostilities", even when we were launching drone strikes. So think about the dangerous precedent that this is setting; the executive branch can engage in drone strikes for an indefinite amount of time, with out any approval from congress. In general, the problem with these "humanitarian" interventions is that we cant predict the future, there could be civil war, another dictator could rise up ect..... we had to train and arm Osama Bin Laden because the soviets were such a dangerous threat, look how that turned out.
I guarantee if McCain was president and had taken the same action in Libya, all of the liberal Obama apologists would be unanimously opposed, calling it an abuse of power.
bullshit
the neocon lie was that saddam had WMD
"the neocon lie was that saddam had WMD"
This was one of the many neocon lies, no doubt. At the time they would change their justification for the war every time they were proven wrong. None of this negates the fact that they also accused critics of the war of being “objectively pro-Saddam". Just as opponents of the Libya war were accused of being on Gadaffis side, or being cool with genocide.
http://www.slate.com/articles/news_and_politics/ballot_box/2003/09/the_gaffes_of_howard_dean.html
http://www.salon.com/2011/06/23/libya_11/
Obviously there are big differences between the war in Iraq and the intervention in Libya, but in either case, accusing someone who has principled opposition to the war of siding with the enemy or being OK with genocide is bullshit
"over 13 mass grave sites have been uncovered since Gadhafi was ousted from power, including the remains of some 1200 political prisoners ... " Thats very sad.......but it does not follow that we should allow the president to wage war indefinitely without approval from congress. And do you really think the main impetus for the intervention was "humanitarian"? Our foreign policy has always been driven by self interest, consolidation of power and exploitation of natural resources
http://www.commondreams.org/headline/2011/08/27
The war in Libya was not waged indefinitely.
exploitation of unsuspecting indigenous or foreign national populations is a serious consideration, one that deserves close attention
did you just say that? I can't believe you just said that
I am proud of our involvement in Libya
"The war in Libya was not waged indefinitely."
your missing the point
from wikipedia "The War Powers Resolution requires the President to notify Congress within 48 hours of committing armed forces to military action and forbids armed forces from remaining for MORE THAN 60 days, with a further 30 day withdrawal period, without an authorization of the use of military force or a declaration of war." Again, the argument was that drone strikes dont count as "hostilities". So the time limit did not apply. This sets a dangerous precedent, do you not agree?
What about the fact Obama can assassinate a US citizen with out any due process, with no evidence accept government accusations, are you OK with that too? The laws are important, you dont follow them only when its convenient to do so.
Genocide is very tragic and if there is a way we can prevent it that complies with the constitution and the rule of law, and we know that it will not backfire or lead to more problems, we should do so.
The Libya intervention may turn out to be a success if they can transition to a stable democracy, either way it should have been done in compliance with the law. We are conducting drone strikes in 6 different countries, I doubt most americans are even aware of this.
NO, I' don't think I am missing the point.
In case you haven't noticed congress is broken
they can't even pass a goddamned budget
How many mass graves did they find so far?
Genocide is very tragic
that's pithy. REal fucking pithy
since you are either unwilling or unable to respond to any of the points I have made and since you appear to be accusing me of callousness without knowing me or trying to understand my position, Im going to end this conversation, so much for trying to have a reasonable discussion with someone on the internet
I do greatly appreciate that -
since I do indeed find your position completely unreasonable
and totally indefensible
Egyptians used non-violance.
non violence?they raped an american reporter. the msm buried the story because they support the "cause"
what egypt has now is a totalitarian theocracy.
I don't know about the rape story. Haven't heard about it. Not saying it's no true. But their tactic was that of non-violence. While the Libyan rebels used violence and weapons openly. And when you have to use violence as a tactic to get your way, then you don't deserve support imo.
she did an interview on it - that girl has balls
there was no excuse for what was done
There is never an excuse for rape. Like i said, i don't know anything about it and it is not on topic of what i was talking about.
perhaps not - but you did compare apples to oranges and claim part of the difference was the issue of violence.
how did i compare apples to oranges?
you said:
such a statement contains the unspoken assumption that access to change was equal to both popular uprisings - this is not the case. The methods of repression were quite different in each instance.
Human beings, like all creatures, have an inherent right to defend themselves. When confronting a mass murderer it is not in the interest of the public to retain principals of non-violence once it is clear the mass murderer intends to respond in character, with wide spread, indiscriminate slaughter.
Well obviously no situation is completely the same. In that logic you could never compare anything.
Lara Logan , reporter for cbs was gang raped in tahir square, feb, 2011. do search , read for yourself.
Shut your stoned fried mouth, Khadafi had been running amok, committing horrific attrocities against humanity, and killing innocent people for over 30 fucking years, and often with American appearing funds subsidizing him.
Dems and Repubs both toyed around with deceptive illusion creation, in regards to many alleged tyrants and terrorists, to keep fools like you thinking small and eternally unfocused.
hey dumbass u know what happened when Khadafi was killed? they started killing anyone who was black. there were pilles of dead blacks. Kadafi was going to go onto the gold standerd so NATO was called into kill him.
Do you think it was coincidence that in that same window of time the Fed's 16 trillion dollar oversight was discovered and made public?
i don't smoke pot you nimrod.
for over 30 years the people of Libya saw no opportunity to rise up. Then the Arab Spring blossomed over the middle east, and they seized that opportunity.
You saying we funded Gadhafi? After Lockerbie? Prove it. Lets see the evidence.
you rabid right wing fuck
I don't teach pigs to sing. I'd also never accuse you of being a pot head. I made it real clear that you obviously have smoked way too much arm dope.
The power is split between the congress and the president. You need both to declare war as per the constitution.
Maybe you should know about the constitution. http://law2.umkc.edu/faculty/projects/ftrials/conlaw/warandtreaty.htm
Watch the hour long presentation by Louie Gohmert. He uses facts in his entire presentation in congress.
We have no right to interfere with countries. Next you'll say we should have bombed and invaded China and overthrow their government because of what they did to the people in Tibet. No thanks to world war there guy.
Maybe YOU should learn more about Louie Gohmert??
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dQVfQCpYocQ
That's right. He's the jerk that started the whole "TERROR BABIES" conspiracy that died out because he had absolutely no evidence and all his alleged "facts" were lies.
I don't agree with Louie Gohmert, but YOU CAN'T DENY FACTS. Look up every piece of info he brings to the table that presentation. Yep, it's facts. It's also back by Dennis Kucinich
Also that doesn't change the fact that you were wrong about constitutional authority in regards to war.
That's ZenDog that said that.
However, it is incorrect think that troops can never be legally deployed unless there is a formal declaration of war.US can commit troops to any engagement by UN Resolution. Formal declaration of war has never been a requirement to deploy troops. From the Quasi-War with France in 1798 to the first time we sent troops to Libya (First Barbary War of 1802) to the next one (Second Barbary War of 1816).
I think it's perfectly reasonable to disagree with it, but that doesn't change the fact that it's still legal. As was the Iraq War(which I strongly disagree with). The problem with Louie Gohmert is that he's just a demagogue looking to score political points. As for Dennis Kucinich, he legitimately believes that the ability for Congress or UN to deploy troops should be more limited, and so I can at least respect Kucinich while disagreeing with him.
I said it was unconstitutional. That claim is also backed by congressman Dennis Kucinich, not just some guy like me on the internet.
And I said it's not. I believe the Constitution says that, Only Congress shall Declare War. I completely agree. However, nobody BUT Congress has ever DECLARED WAR. If Dennis Kucinich believes he has a good case, he can bring it to the Supreme Court. No Congressman has ever done that, but I believe that he is sincere in believing what he says and will support him bringing it before the proper authority that is constitutionally delegated the power to interpret the constitution.
And really, that all these arguments are brought to bear against an international action, advocated by the Arab League, enforcing a UN resolution, to stop the pending humanitarian disaster in Misrata (I had friends there, and the situation was very real) is ridiculous.
It was right for all the reasons Iraq was a lie.
The government does indeed like to play semantics games with word definitions in regards to war.
It's not a war... it's operation Odyssey Dawn.
To me, war is war, we wiped out a regime/entire government for a country in alliance with a rebellion. That to me is 100% war. And to do that without congressional approval is in clear violation of the constitution.
Clear violation of what part of the Constitution?
Here you go.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Declaration_of_war_by_the_United_States
What you posted backs up what I say and not what you say. You may want to read it.
Yes and if you read the entire bit, it mentions many parts where i claim they use semantics games to get around it. Also you have to factor in the part about being a threat to our country. which libya was not.
Congressman Kucinich on the topic of constitutionality and Libya. He explains it much better than I can.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6pVo7-gOkqo
The words semantic, semantics, game, or games don't appear once in the article. Yet you claim it does because you feel lying for your own beliefs is justified. It is you that is playing semantic games to get around the fact that the claims you've made are a tissue of lies. I'm sure if Congressman Kucinich knew you, he wouldn't want such a dishonest person purporting to represent his views.
It won't let me reply to your comment below.
Nowhere in the Constitution does it say that deployment of troops is limited to war.
Like I said before, it's a semantics game on what is considered war. I think what was done to that country was an act of war. You do not. Obviously it's a semantics game on what war is considered.
It's not about the definition of war. It's about the Declaration of War. Under your standard, the same people that wrote the constitution broke it several times. Under mine, they didn't. If you want to invoke Constitutional intent for your argument of what is permitted under the constitution, you need not look further than the actions of those wrote it. Unfortunately for you, it doesn't back up your argument at all.
Wow. Let me post the exact portion you're talking about "i claim they use semantics games." I never said the link mentions the words semantics games. The link specifically mentions words that need to be used in certain regards to the declaration of war and such. Which backs my claim of semantics games.
"The link specifically mentions words that need to be used in certain regards to the declaration of war and such."
And I've explained to you that nobody but Congress has DECLARED WAR. Nowhere in the Constitution does it say that deployment of troops is limited to war.
Also, nothing in the article has backed up anything that you claim. That's not my fault. I did not make you such a poor liar. I am only the messenger.
Libya and China are two different nations with two different war making capabilities.
It was entirely within our capability to act. It could be argued that under the circumstances, it was our obligation to act.
and the fucking Congress isn't even credible today. Not with repelican intransigence, the scumbags.
Like I said:
that fucking guy was a mass murderer - the people rose up and asked for our assistance.
without it they would all have been slain.
Do you get that?
without it they would all have been slain.
They said that about Saddam and the USA, the UN, and NATO have killed way more innocent Iraqi's than Saddam Hussein ever dreamed of.
From 1990 to 1996 alone 500,000 children died in Iraq due to UN sanctions which were 100% supported by the USA
different issue
113 thousand documented iraq civilian deaths since the start of the recent war in Iraq.
Operation Iraqi freedom was to overthrow a government run by a tyrant. Which was Saddam Hussein. We used the same claim to bomb the fuck out of Libya and supported a terrorist and islamist extremist organization overthrow their government in Libya.
In no way do I support Gaddafi, but I'm saying what was done there was fucking stupid.
I disagree
vehemently
The op in Iraq was sold to the American public on a faulty premise, WMD, they outed a CIA operative when she dug up the facts, and behind this whole thing was the neo-con concept of a 50 year occupation - we've built the biggest embassy in the world, at a cost of a half billion dollars, and with slave labor, in support of that concept.
Whole different situation from Libya.
You can call it an organic populist movement, or you can qualify that by insisting US repelicans were behind the whole Arab Spring movement - whatever.
You can claim that the fall of Gadhafi opens the door to US corporate exploitation - and if that is your claim, I say it is certainly a credible possibility - perhaps even likely.
That becomes a whole other problem.
The people in Misrata were going to be slaughtered by Gadhafi. About that there is no dispute. It isn't likely he would have stopped there.
The US military played a very limited roll, over the objections of repelicans like John McCain, who advocated taking a lead role.
The President got that one exactly right, that is my position, and I'm sticking to it baring any new information - relevant specifically to our participation.
We saved lives.
Yes but NATO and Obama supported a terrorist organization in the process. gaddafi is indeed a brutal dictator and killer. I'm not arguing that. but the people in power now are doing the same thing to different people. Oh and the rebellion in Libya is full of al qaeda members. So yeah you support them when you say you support the actions of NATO and the Obama administration.
numbers - I want data. how many dead, how systematic is the killing. Gadhafi took a bullet in the head - but I haven't heard that there is wide spread reprisals going on - last I heard, which was some time ago, was that there was an effort at the top to keep a lid on that shit.
again, I want data. How prevalent are they. Are you saying that al Qaida is in the process of taking over and they appear to be successful?
I haven't heard that. I haven't looked into it. I haven't looked into it because the last I knew their numbers were small - the was a claim made by Gadhafi before he lost power, one without a lot of credibility - that the whole uprising was al-Qaida inspired.
I find it hard to believe that al-qaida had significant numbers in Libya while Gadhafi was in control - they may have slipped in during the unrest - possible. But in what numbers?
I can't believe the people of Libya want to trade one dictator for another. I doubt al-Qaida will get very far.
Watch the videos I posted on this. I posted several links in my original post. The hour long presentation in congress on the regards to Libya references a bunch of different articles, which you can check.
i'm on dial-up
Really? It's 2011. Google "Libyan Rebels Al Qaeda" and "Libyan Rebels kill blacks."
a lot of the blacks were mercenaries hired by Gadhafi - not that that makes killing them the right thing to do, but given the atrocities at the hands of Gadhafi forces it isn't too surprising
You should google
Libya sniper
Libya sniper Misrata
But you were okay with Saddam Hussein?
he was a murderous thug - when the shia rose up Bush I let them down.
I don't recall them asking for our assistance prior to our invasion, rather Bush II was screaming:
I see WMD
Well the whole world said WMD and by our govts definition of the word now there were plenty.( a pipe bomb is considered a WMD by our govt now.) That's neither here nor there though. Didn't Bush II do a good thing by removing him from power?
what kind of argument is this?
Lets examine it for a minute:
This is how you turn you mind off -
by looking at the government as a whole instead of individual pieces and individual people
discredit everything with a claim they have redefined WMD - without proof mind you that they have done so
What kind of argument is that? You are using twisted logic. Is it good he is gone from power? Sure. That does not justify the methods by which he was removed, nor do these methods compare in any way, shape, or form with what happened in Libya.
Iraq and Libya are two totally different situations.
You brought up the WMD not me. What was wrong with the methods used to remove him?
Yes I did, you brought up an assertion that the term has been redefined, you did so for a specific purpose, which I was pointing out.
You don't know what was wrong with the methods?
the claim was put forth that he had a WMD program, when he did not, and there was evidence supporting the fact that the WMD programs had in fact ended
that pretty much takes away all justification for our invasion - but
there was also a claim of al Qaida in Iraq - another assertion that was demonstrably false at that time
Hence, we were led into Iraq on the basis of two distinct lies
The planning:
It was assumed that we would be seen as liberators - this was not true, and not supported by demographic analysis indicating something like 34 different tribes present within Iraq, many of whom have such competing interests and commitments to those interests that violence between them was inevitable once Saddam was removed
complete dismantling of the structure of government including disbanding the army, resulting in social chaos and violence
weapons depots not secured
cultural sites not secured
the fundamental objective, a 50 year occupation of Iraq by U.S., was delusional at best, one that did not examine either the will or the needs of the Iraqi people, let alone our own national interests, and because this objective was based on faulty analysis, it allowed for the entire invasion to be sold on the basis of lies, and it's methods of achieving its goals were put forth with insurmountable design flaws.
In short, we went to war in Iraq on the basis of an ideology that was fundamentally flawed at the outset, and this allowed for the inevitable spread of faulty thinking, planning and implementation throughout the entire process.
I think we'll have to agree to disagree on this one. Bush acted with the backing of Congress and under a U.N. resolution.
yeah -
so, just forget about every other consideration? Like the how and why Congress went along?
Or the fact that within the U.N. there were reservations?
Yes, what you say happen, did happen. A failure to examine how and why, is to remain ignorant of the process, thus ignoring both its weaknesses, and its strengths, and if you can't do that, then how can you attempt to guide the Movement in a direction toward success?
eureka , I learned a new language.
do I love BHO? NO!
but the republican voter suppression machine is running full time here
THINK !!!!!
you know who you HAVE to vote for if you want>
thank you, bensdad. you've cut to the chase most effectively amid many distractions.
i think i'll post your comment on my blog. here you go: http://phobizone.blogspot.com/2011/12/occupywallst.html
It seems to me that the world is far more complicated than it at first appears. Good intentions and ideas fall away when people find out the real truths behind what is going on. We the people are never fully informed about the entire situation so we fall victim to half truth and slogans.
If we all actually knew the whole truth then we might make the same decisions that Obama has had to make. Shitty thing to consider but there are many more factors that the bulk of the electorate is too stupid to understand.
I will vote for Obama, again, and if Elizabeth Warren runs for president then I will vote for her. I like that she tells it like it is.
a vote for 0bama is a vote for the suicide of the USA.
Agreed. You put it well.
Really? It really isn't but, nice attempt at trying to rationalize why he's done the exact opposite at what he promised the people who foolishly elected him.
Our nation needs to get it's own house in order and take care of it's own. If this means unplugging from the rest of the world and allowing American Ingenuity solve any problems arising from that, big federal government, especially corrupt and completely unaccountable, will also self-perpetuate itself and prevent any such common sense remedies from being brought about.
you advocating "unplugging from the rest of the world" or opposing it?
Mostly unplugging from simple minded people who insist of remaining blissfully ignorant in their alleged struggle to restore our nation to greatness.
beepbeepbeep communication breakdown beepbeepbeep
I'm not really interested in communicating with people like you. Surely you have noticed.
i have indeed. you've made claims but won't back them up with information. if you really want to change my mind, why don't you tell me what i need to know? you apparently expect folk to just accept what you say, no matter how outlandish it appears. anybody who questions you, you just ridicule.
Outlandish? Well outlandish would be the results you see today brought about by these things. Reasonable would be go study for yourself and not expect people you trash talk to respond to you otherwise.
http://www.gpoaccess.gov/
http://www.gpo.gov/fdsys/
what does the govt printing office website have to do with "unplugging from the rest of the world"?
are you capable of making sense?
Again, I've no use attempting communication with you or sharing my ideals with you either. If I did, it certainly would not be at your command. I simply don't like people like you, so............ gfy.
randart, yeah. complexity really messes things over. but there are always folk whose predilections or preconceptions blind them, who start throwing round accusations, namecalling, etc.
i added your comment to my blogpost. URL is under bensdad's post just above this.
Obama will win. Its a lock. Im focusing on developing other options. Sooner or later, the largest voting bloc (the ones who dont vote because they hate politicians) are going to get involved and want REAL choices.
I'm voting for Obama. Am I bad or something?
No. Vote for who you want. But at least criticize the guy where he's in the wrong and try and make him better.
I do that all the time, he's been a below average Democratic president.
I gave him 2 years. I think this SNL skit summed it up nicely.
http://videocafe.crooksandliars.com/heather/snl-spoofs-obama
I'll give him some cred in some places, but his foreign pro-war policy is violent and his support and voting history on the theft of our bill of rights reminds me of the Bush administration. 3 years to end a "Dumb War" ? Perfectly matching up with the time of the Status of Forces Agreement signed under Bush in 2008. I don't buy it. And now all this shit with Iran all of the sudden? Reminds me of that scene in the movie W where Cheney says Iran is the prize in the center. His health care reform has some perks, the parts in place now, but we all know a private insurance company health care system is not what we voted for.
First off let's all remember who prints the money - the Bureau of Printing and Engraving which is part of the Treasury. Allowing banks/credit unions to borrow money "actual dollars" directly from the Treasury - at cost - would create huge competition among banks/credit unions and the cost to Americans to borrow money would go way down. The banks/credit unions would charge interest and/or fees based on what income they needed to stay in business (salaries, expenses, overhead, etc...) instead of predetermined rates. In other words the market (competition) would decide what each bank/credit union charged as interest. What banks/credit unions do you think would thrive in such a situation? The small local ones of course as they can do "business" much cheaper than the larger ones. Local credit unions who are owned by the members and aren't beholden to a bunch of whining stockholders hungry for dividends would do better than banks. GO LOCAL - YEAH BUDDY!
Ron Lawl has my vote... I know i won't be voting Obama
I hate to say it but the elite and their minions in Washington seem to be preparing for something...The stealing that is going on on Wall Street and in the financial sector in general, is just too blatant...The lying of our President is right in your face (If you care to look).
I'm beginning to think all this NWO/2012 sh*t is actually not just a conspiracy theory...It's getting more real everyday...
You can blast me...But there is something going on here, beyond "normal".
You know if they didn't pass laws like the provisions of the NDAA I would have no reason to agree with the NWO theory. But when those guys start making predictions... and NOW THEY'RE ACTUALY COMING TRUE. And you're 100% right. The corruption is just so obvious now and they're still getting away with it.
Did you know that Novus Ordo Seclorum is printed on our dollar bill under the all seeing eye? Did you know it means The New Order of the Ages?
I fully agree. There is indeed something going on. Which is why I'm moving to Canada at the first sign of the "FEMA camps." I don't believe that's what they're for... but with all this crap going on about detaining US citizens without trial... fucked up.
By the time those FEMA camps go live...There probably won't be any getting out....We seem to be entering a Fascist stage...
I know! My Alex Jones side keeps telling me that but my Dennis Kucinich side tells me I'll have time to get out before it gets that bad, if it ever were to get that bad.
I just have a really bad feeling about all this..With NDAA passing all bets are off.
Don't forget about that part where he neglected to restore Habeus Corpus and took millions in campaign contributions from Goldman Sachs.
Organize a massive "Voter Exodus" to:
Vote Green!
Oh... And here's some ideas too:
http://occupywallst.org/forum/communism-is-the-way-to-go/#comment-513577
http://occupywallst.org/forum/can-anarchy-really-work/#comment-513698
http://occupywallst.org/forum/nutshell-is-back-new-and-improved/
http://metapolitik.org/article/approaching-metapolitical-discourse/
Obama isn't someone I admire but the GOP candidates have been pulled out of a fricking circus.
Really true. I think the GOP candidates were selected so as to get Obama re-elected. After all, Obama is already doing such a fine job for the 1%, why bother getting somebody else in there.
The lesser of two evils. I will vote for Obama unless there is someone who emerges that shows honesty or a brain worthy of being president.
I think the solution should be that a president can only serve ONE six year term so they don't have to go through this political carnival every four years and don't have to pander to special interests.
Please remember that Obama is a member of the Democratic party. This party is in thrall to the 1% just as the Republican party is. The 1% would really like to have a one party system. That, however, is not democratic. So we have a two party system. Since both parties can not be identical, one party needs to be different from the other. But not so different that it would genuinely challenge the hegemony of the 1%.
So we end up with a winner take all system. Where third parties are rendered irrelevant. The unfortunate consequence of this is that third parties end up supporting the political platform of the very parties they oppose. Perot elects Clinton and Nader elects Bush.
Electoral politics t(i.e. The two party system) end up keeping the 1% in control of an electoral system that controls, the three branches of government through their media, lobbyists, courts, police and armed thugs.
It should be obvious that today, all efforts should be directed to building and strengthening the Occupy Movement, and avoid the deadly trap of the two party system.
No, lets "boycott" the voting booth, get a "GOP" President, Congress and Supreme Court, added to the power of corporate vested interest and watch them declair martial law, and crush this movement with main force. Good plan, troll.
Wow that is an ignorant comment. I never once said boycott the voting booth. But George W Obama is throwing your vote away to more bullshit. Do you even understand what OWS is about? Do you even understand what I posted here is all factual information? Do you even understand that Obama is paid by the big banks...? A lot of the same banks he told congress to bailout...?
I also understand it can get a lot worse.
So who is your suggested candidate? There are shades of gray here - Newt Gingrich is going to be far more dangerous than Obama. Can Obama fix the system? Nope, he is just one man and he is beholden to the people (all of the people, not just the radicalized left wing). However, while we all work for greater change I highly urge everyone to vote, for whichever candidate they consider the lesser of the evils. Presidents (and other politicians) still wield enough power to make real changes - changes that create the kind of laws that give corporations personhood or strip workers of rights or allow the long-term destruction of natural resources for short-term profit. Yes Obama isn't great, however until there is campaign finance reform, we are going to be stuck with choosing between bad and worse, and not choosing at all is giving away one source of power that we are still guaranteed.
There is no source of power when you are left with bad and worse.
The problem is there isnt anyone worth voting on, that includes obama.
this is exactly why we need to vote for Ron Paul
so what is the alternative right now he is the lesser of all evils but you know the lesser evil is still evil the change we want will take years decades to achieve so our only alternative is to do the best with what we have right now which is Obama and to work towards,bit by bit , the reforms we need every president needs to be pushed hard to do what is right that is were the OWS movement plays it's role Kennedy and Johnson needed to be pushed into passage of the Civil Rights Act of 1964
I personally think RonPaul is the best choice. But what do I know... I just don't like Wall Street Banks and war.
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2011/12/10/ron-paul-proposes-interes_n_1140723.html?ref=mostpopular
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HRduwYgrU7A&feature=related
If I could have my way, it'd be Dennis Kucinich.
you ever read this?: http://www.ontheissues.org/tx/ron_paul.htm
you likely agree with ronpaul on 5 or 6 positions out of hundreds. ending the fed is BS. so is the gold standard. so is the idea that we can't mend social security. his grasp of economics leaves a lot to be desired.
Don't bail out banks; bail out homeowners. (Oct 2011)
Wall Street is dumping its trouble onto Main Street. (Sep 2008)
Auditing the fed revealed $5T loaned to foreign banks. (Oct 2011)
We’re worse off than in 2000, due to Bush & Congress. (Jan 2008)
We spend $1.5T on wars; start by cutting there. (Sep 2011)
1980s had huge deficits, despite Reagan's message. (Sep 2011)
Country is bankrupt & we can't keep spending. (Aug 2011)
We can’t afford a trillion-dollar war in Iraq. (Jan 2006)
Great nations and empires end for financial reasons. (Feb 2008)
Rights belong only to individuals, not collective groups. (Dec 1987)
He has openly stated that corporations are not people. (2011)
Voted NO on Constitutionally defining marriage as one-man-one-woman. (Jul 2006)
Big business demand for easy money causes inflation. (Dec 1981)
Someday we'll wake up and end the Second Prohibition. (Apr 2011)
$500B on War on Drugs since 1970s has been a total failure. (Sep 2007)
Stop enforcing No Child Left Behind; allow opt-out of system. (Sep 2011)
Close Dept. of Education, but don’t dismantle public schools. (Dec 2007)
Voted NO on allowing Courts to decide on "God" in Pledge of Allegiance. (Jul 2006)
Voted NO on allowing school prayer during the War on Terror. (Nov 2001)
Cool link. Actually I agreed with almost all of it.
Of course I don't agree with him on everything. But the people I 100% agree with aren't running for president. If it was up to me I'd be voting for Dennis Kucinich in 2012. But I agree with RonPaul on 80% of his message. And I hate to sound selfish, but the things I disagree with won't affect me. I just want these wars to be over and I want a president that will stand up for the bill of rights.
Ron Lawl on the economy http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rQinW6hPme4&feature=related
ok, you got me. it's more than 5 or 6, tho many of his statements don't really qualify as positions.
but you left out a few i consider deal-breakers: paul wants to phase out social security, end the fed, and return to the gold standard.
I'm not thrilled with Obama, he suffers from the flaw all democrats have. not having the guts to throw the GOP under the bus. What alternative will their be? Newt? I'd rather have a guy who might get a decent congress and find the balls to fight the %1 then a Newt who I know will grovel at the rich mans feet
So find me a candidate that is willing to do everything Obama promised to do once elected, capable of pulling the passel of spoiled toddlers we call a Congress along with him, and is capable of actually getting himself elected as things stand now. Do that, and I might vote for that candidate. Otherwise I'm going to have to choose between Obama and Gingrich, and I'm going to choose Obama.
It really sucks that will most likely be our 2 choices. I will not vote for either and will choose a 3rd party. And then when Gingrich wins I will move to Canada. If RonPaul somehow takes the repub spot, I'm voting to end the wars and end the fed.
Dennis Kucinich is who we need to run for president again. He's the perfect balance.
in 1968 i voted for a 3rd party, the peace & freedom party. nixon won. you think he was better than humphrey?
I'm not going to buy into this lesser of two evils bullshit anymore. I'll never be on the wrong side again. If our country needs to vote itself retarded and elect people like Gingrich, I think they'll learn a valuable lesson. It's like when you're a parent and your kid keeps getting in trouble. You bail them out of jail so many times. Eventually you got to let them serve their time. Which is why I'll be moving to Canada in 2013. hahaha. I don't know. I'm just not going to vote Obama. I'm not going to support a liar anymore.
voters didn't learn anything. nixon, reagan, bush, bush. they got fooled over and over again. and your fear of lesser evil thinking is part of the problem. no politician is perfect. they're human, so they all fuck up sometimes. but some are better than others.
over the last several decades the gop has become the party that seeks power by any means that works so they can advance their divide and rule agenda that results in workers so powerless and desperate that they'll work for slave wages and make trillions for the corporate elite. the 1% (with some exceptions) wants the gop to win.
look at economics. it's pretty much about supply and demand, both of which can be manipulated by those with the resources to do it in order to maximize their profits. and if they can influence economic demand, they can influence political opinion with similar methods. it's called marketing.
don't buy into the myth that obama's a liar. it's part of another paranoid conspiracy theory you've been sold. politifact says he's kept 159 of his promises. don't you see how hard it's been to do that? the gops have made it no secret their highest priority is to beat him. it comes before restoring the economy, and they know high unemployment hurts him, so they try everything to block anything that will boost hiring.
it's not because they hate him. it's because they love power. they tried to destroy every dem from fdr on, and they use fear and smear to attack everything connected to dems, whittling away at folks' opinion and peeling off votes. they know their chances improve every time somebody like you gets so disaffected s/he sits out an election. you can't pretend you're not on the wrong side. if you don't vote, you help the gop win.
Obama is financed by the 1% and he supported bailing out a banking system that is foreclosing on people's homes and devalues the nation's currency. Obama is a liar on many counts.
"Since the start of 2007, his campaign relied on bigger donors and smaller donors nearly equally, pulling in successive donations mostly over the Internet." 88% of his funding came from individual donations. http://www.opensecrets.org/pres08/summary.php?id=n00009638
yes, he should've frozen foreclosures, but your devaluation idea is meaningless, and what was the alternative to a bailout? i'll answer that: collapse. also, the bailout was before his election, so calling him a liar over it makes no more sense than blaming him for it.
I'm okay if goldman sachs goes belly up.
that's funny!
you recall when lehman melted down? that's when bush's boys finally realized what a mess they'd made.
and you'd like to see more of the same.
but wouldn't that prove the free market a failure?
the free market isn't a failure because I don't believe that fraud is supposed to be involved with capitalism. It just proves the corrupt need to be shut down. I believe the current banking system is unconstitutional and fraudulent. I think if we pass HR2990 and abolished the fed and returned the power to system established in the constitution we'd be problem free of a banking system that is extracting and stealing all the wealth in this country.
So what's the problem? Banks stealing people's homes? So why would we bailout the institutions stealing people's homes to only let them continue stealing people's homes?
suppose we do abolish the fed. how will monetary policy get carried out?
Look up Dennis Kucinich's HR 2990.
The federal reserve was actually federal at one point in time right. It operated essentially the same but instead of borrowing money owed back at interest and a central bank being able to do whatever it wanted, the government didn't need to borrow money and it didn't owe anything to a bank at interest. Instead of a private industry investing in itself and doing their own bidding, like pocketing trillions, the old monetary policy allowed the government to invest in America. The federal reserve used our bailout money through it's fractional banking system to create 7.7 trillion dollars out of thin air. If our country had the ability to do that we would have no debt and our country would be able to invest in itself building roads and creating a better society. Believe it or not... it is actually that simple.
i commented on hr 2990 somewhere else on this page. you sure you're not repeating yourself?
where do you get the absurd idea the govt didn't borrow money or owe banks at interest? ever heard of war? for example:
http://www.treasurydirect.gov/kids/history/history_civilwar.htm
or go back to the revolutionary war. we borrowed from france and netherlands. http://www.treasurydirect.gov/kids/history/history.htm
Ok Obama is a big dispointment.
tell me who to vote for
If enough Dems say they will not vote for Obama, the Dems will nominate someone else.
WAY too late for a primary announcement. Even if someone made the announcement last June, it would have been the latest announcement for primary in history. Also, nobody has ever successfully unseated an incumbent in a primary. All they've ever done is make them weak enough to lose the general election.
I imagine 007 is correct. OWS99% needs to plan ahead for 2014 midterms and 2016. The NGA will begin applying pressure July 4th 2012.
http://occupywallst.org/forum/876-leaders-republicrats-worst-nightmare-im-good-w/
That would be a dream come true. We need to get Dennis Kucinich to run for president again. I personally believe the National Emergency Employment Defense Act of 2011, HR 2990, is step 1 to a greater society.
Here is a video of all his replies in a 2003 debate http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qYWWBwf2wHE
I would be thrilled to see Kucinich run.
That is a great video. Thanks.
Vote for the delegates in your district that are going to the National General Assembly July 4th. Or be a delegate.
http://occupywallst.org/forum/876-leaders-republicrats-worst-nightmare-im-good-w/
I'm not going to do that. But through process of elimination, it should be easier to figure out.
Ron Paul
http://www.gemworld.com/USAVSUS.HTM
http://www.barefootsworld.net/consti16.html
learn enough to pass this test and your decision will be quite obvious.
I think if we're going to criticize religion, we should apply the idea of "equal opportunity criticism" :)
Okay, a guy comes back down from a mountain, and tells you he just had a meaningful conversation with a burning bush, a group of people dressed in desert gear walk up to you and tell you a story of how their cult leader came back from the dead (yet floated to heaven, so incidentally he won't be able to verify the story for us), a guy emerges from a cave and tells you he just had a one on one conversation with an angel of god, a 19th century dude (with several previous arrests for being a con man) tells you an angel just delivered inscribed golden tablets to him, but no one else is allowed to view the tablets (except for him of course) ....
Religion in a nutshell. Oh wait, maybe this reveals some deeper aspect of human nature we're not in tune with. Nope, it just reveals that humans have a pretty good capacity for gullibility and delusion, nothing all that mysterious.
"Oh wait, maybe this reveals some deeper aspect of human nature we're not in tune with."
You are closer than you realize.. ..you are getting very warm :-]
Elaborate attempts to explain this away as something other than what it is ... is just theologians (and their guru counterparts) struggling to remain relevant.
Not everyone is as deeply involved in unlocking the mysteries of the unknown.. it's a difficult research of study and contemplation.. just as all research can be.. We don't have a cure for cancer .. does that mean it doesn't exist ?
Notice how Obama is studiously avoiding the message of "Hope and Change". He knows he would be laughed off the podium. Instead, he is counting on the gullible masses to re-elect him to four more years after he sold them out. He attacks the wealthy 1% in public for not paying their fair share while privately soliciting campaign contributions from them. Don't pay any attention to what this fraud says because it is not worth a warm bucket of spit.
You spelled "O-bomb-ya" wrong. Just ask Libya. :)
[Removed]
A lot of those thing are parts of the problem. And Obama supports most of them.
[Removed]
So here is the rub.
I volunteered for the Obama campaign in Ohio (i lived in MI) and handed out flyers door to door and helped people know where their polling station was. I drove to DC and watched him get sworn in. I was a dyed in the wool supporter that was sure he was going to usher in a more honest and transparent way of doing business. I even went so far as making this: http://hubski.com/pub?id=3162
I now feel completely hoodwinked.
Now, unless someone from a 3rd party runs, I will likely have the option of Obama and some GOP candidate (Romney, Gingrich). Given those options, I have to vote Obama. This time though, it will be the lesser of 2 evils, not someone I am driving to DC to see sworn in.
He has let me down.
I honestly believe Obama will lose no matter what. He had a fuck ton of support in 2008 and only won by 4%. I definitely think there is more than a 4% margin of people who either will not vote this time around or will not vote for him. It's going to be a republican no matter what. I don't care what any polls say.
I also am in the same boat of feeling betrayed. I voted for that liar too. My hope was originally for Dennis Kucinich... but he didn't have a lot of corporate funding and Wall Street banks in his back pocket. And sadly I also think a lot of people vote based on looks as a judge of character. Kucinich is a short feeble looking old guy. Have you ever read HR 2990? The NEED act of 2011.
Bills like this is why I wish Dennis Kucinich would have been president in 2008.
http://www.govtrack.us/congress/billtext.xpd?bill=h112-2990
no, he won by 7%, nearly 10 million votes.
just one of many misconceptions in your posts. i wonder how many it takes to qualify as delusions?
Obama had 54% of the vote. Forgive my offhand typo. You must be an adult.
53%. biggest majority in at least 20 years.
Most people vote for the same reason they are attracted to any person. If someone is passionate, that is attractive. Candidate Obama was very passionate and convincing in his declarations to uphold our civil liberties etc. -He lied. You're right.
Kucinich will never be president. Sorry, just a fact.
I agree it will be a GOP'er unless the Tea Party puts up an independent candidate?? Palin? That would mean an Obama Victory. Which isn't much different than a GOP victory policy wise.
Well yeah, kucincich isn't even running for president. But here's why I'm hoping for Ron PauI. I fully trust Dennis Kucinich and in 2008 he said he'd choose Ron PauI as his running mate. I'm hoping he takes the repub seat.
Thinking your vote for President is actually worth something is a waste of time. Anybody honest person who makes it into the White House will have a bullet in his head before he makes it through his first day. I suggest writing in Micky Mouse this next election.
Only solution is active resistance outside the system.
Yeah but that's how newt Gingrich becomes president.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WiZ8D9akdV4&feature=related
Don't worry, Gingrich will be nothing more than a house boy taking orders, just like the guy who is in there now. No matter what he says, he won't do anything more or less radical than what anyone else would do 'cause he is there to only follow orders. But if voting for Obama makes you feel anymore comfortable, go ahead and do so. I prefer Obama over Gingrich myself. I'm just saying don't sweat it too much, and don't put too much effort into the affair, when the real problem cannot be solved by an election.
Why would I vote Obama? I'm the guy that made this post about why people should not vote Obama.
Now you got me confused. Sounds like you don't like Newt either. Anyway, either way it makes no difference to me. Maybe Micky Mouse is the vote of choice after all. Unfortunately, anybody with a lick of morals and sense will not be allowed to become President.
"anybody with a lick of morals and sense will not be allowed to become President."
Sadly very accurate.
The instant gratification so many of you seek just isn't going to happen especially when the environment that Obama inherited is so unconducive to change. I am an independent but I voted for Obama. If nothing better is in place by November, I will again. Politics is not my area of expertise and I defer to the more knowledgeable people on here to explain. But I have been enlightened on this forum about some people I knew little about, such as Elizabeth Warren, Russ Feingold, Bernie Sanders, some other serious sane-sounding people who I would vote for if the opportunity presented. But you can’t convince me to throw away a vote in 2012 unless a viable alternative is IN place, with a decent chance to win. I do think OWS is creating that environment where it could realistically happen. Meantime, I’ve read many comments all over the internet about OWS and countless posts in this forum that should make it glaringly obvious that some form of representation is direly needed here. Understand, a lot of people out there are clueless that there are some brilliant minds among you. The media certainly isn’t going to show them, they’re far more interested in showing butt cracks and such. Right now to a lot of people, you look like 99% chaos. So maybe that’s the nature of the beast. Maybe this is all OWS WANTS to be. IF you have raised national awareness, if you have at least helped create an environment where change can really begin, then you’ve done a LOT. Keep on keeping on. A leaderless movement is working if that’s all you want to accomplish in OWS. But an outgrowth of this, I would hope there will be a third, even fourth party to break the ridiculous stalemate of the 2-party system. And I like what has been said by some on here, to work within the upcoming primaries, start making other changes right now as a bridge to get you where you want to go. The end result of such actions is never going to suit everybody on here, never going to please the 99%, 100%. Ultimately, representation will require some compromise that all can live with. We are NOT going to end up with a country RUN by anarchy, yes I meant to say it that way, and probably not by Libertarians and I hope and pray every night not by Republicans. The brightest and the best among you are looking for something truly effective and workable down the road. They need to come forward and be heard, and other places besides this forum. Sorry for the long post.
mary, thank you for the voice of reason. i'm afraid it might get lost under the barrage of hate and misinformation, but good try.
Thanks, I appreciate that.
Obama is a fucking fraud. Need I re-post all of Obama's bullshit that is in plain view in my orginal post?
Liars and frauds are never to be re-elected. Did you know Obama was on Judicial Watch's most corrupt list 2 years in a row before he even considered running for president?
Dennis Kucinich is a real democrat and a man with a plan that will solve this country. HR 2990. Full employment, ending the federal reserve restoring the monetary power to the constitution and using the new capital to invest in free education for all and free healthcare for all and rebuilding our infrastructure. All the while greatly dropping tax rates and not having to worry about borrowing money from China and the federal reserve.
I don't see Obama coming up with plans like this because it would fuck over all of his banking buddies and help out America instead of the elite rulers.
http://www.govtrack.us/congress/billtext.xpd?bill=h112-2990
Instead, Americans have suffered through lies, stonewalling, cover-ups, corruption, secrecy, scandal and blatant disregard for the rule of law…this has been the Obama legacy in its first two years.
In 2010, Obama was caught in a lie over what he knew about Illinois Governor Rod Blagojevich’s scheme to sell the president’s vacated Senate seat. Blagojevich’s former Chief of Staff John Harris testified that Obama had personal knowledge of Blago’s plot to obtain a presidential cabinet position in exchange for appointing a candidate handpicked by the President. In fact, according to Harris’s court testimony, Obama sent Blagojevich a list of “acceptable” Senate candidates to fill his old seat. Obama was interviewed by the FBI even before he was sworn into office. He claimed he and his staff had no contact with Blagojevich’s office. Unfortunately federal prosecutors never called the President or his staff to testify under oath.
The President also broke his famous pledge to televise healthcare negotiations. And in 2010, we learned why he broke his pledge. In what is now known as the “Cornhusker Kickback” scheme, Obama and the Democrats in the Senate “purchased” the vote of one of the last Democrat hold-outs, Nebraska Senator Ben Nelson, who opposed Obamacare over the issue of covering abortions with taxpayer funds. Nelson abandoned his opposition to Obamacare after receiving millions of dollars in federal aid for his home-state, helping to give the Democrats the 60 votes they needed to overcome a Republican filibuster. Same goes for Louisiana Democratic Senator Mary Landrieu, who received a $100 million payoff in what has been called “The Louisiana Purchase.” (The Kickback was so corrupt that Democrats stripped it out at the last minute. The Louisiana Purchase, on the other hand, became law of the land.)
Obama lied about his White House’s involvement in this legislative bribery that helped lead to the passage of the signature policy achievement of his presidency. The Obama administration turned the National Endowment of the Arts (as well as the agency that runs the AmeriCorps program) into propaganda machines, using tax dollars to persuade "artists" to promote the Obama agenda. According to documents uncovered by Judicial Watch, the idea emerged as a direct result of the Obama campaign and enjoyed White House approval and participation. President Obama has installed a record number of "czars" in positions of power. Too many of these individuals are leftist radicals who answer to no one but the president. And too many of the czars are not subject to Senate confirmation (which raises serious constitutional questions). Under the President’s bailout schemes, the federal government continues to appropriate or control -- through fiat and threats -- large sectors of the private economy, prompting conservative columnist George Will to write: “The administration's central activity -- the political allocation of wealth and opportunity -- is not merely susceptible to corruption, it is corruption.” Government-run healthcare and car companies, White House coercion, uninvestigated ACORN corruption, debasing his office to help Chicago cronies, attacks on conservative media and the private sector, unprecedented and dangerous new rights for terrorists, perks for campaign donors – this is Obama’s “ethics” record -- and we haven't even gotten through the first year of his presidency.
Trevor did you bother to read my entire post before you brought out your big guns? If so you would have noticed that I am ultimately for a third party. In one of your posts you stated.... "It really sucks that will most likely be our 2 choices. I will not vote for either and will choose a 3rd party. And then when Gingrich wins I will move to Canada. If RonPaul somehow takes the repub spot, I'm voting to end the wars and end the fed. Dennis Kucinich is who we need to run for president again. He's the perfect balance." ...So I read about Kucinich and he sounds like he could belong in the list of sane people I named. Right now there is no viable third party. I knew my post would piss off rabid Obama haters like yourself and people who like Ron Lawl and anarchy but oh well. I'm not going to argue. Like I said I leave it to others more knowledgeable.
I did but this part is what triggered my comment
"I am an independent but I voted for Obama. If nothing better is in place by November, I will again."
In no way was I trying to be rude, but you're right, I am a rabid Obama hater. Only because I don't like betrayal. I voted for that liar expecting the best... even though my heart was set on Kucinich, I fell for the lesser of two evils crap and voted for the candidate "with a chance to win."
Obama is a war monger. If he at least didn't piss on the bill of rights, lie about war, and didn't bail out a system stealing people's homes, I could let his other crap slide.
I confess, I do still plan to vote for the President, but if you are not happy with the slate of candidates come election, I will be more than happy to entertain both your support and your vote.
ZenDog for Prez
I changed my political affiliation from Democrat to Socialist TO-DAY! If Obama vetoes NDAA, I MIGHT change it back.
"The Junta which after 9/11 took over the U.S. is very serious. They're much more serious and much more successful than the world mafia. These are thieves, and they are killers, and any president who looks like he is going to stand in the way of their profits and their power... we'll be having one of our state funerals which are beloved by every body." -Gore Vidal
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sYFobCTg7lw
Having read all that, I can kinda understand why Obama did what he did, but why he didn't use his first term to bring the Military Industrial Complex to heal, fast forwarding to the end of our Ben-Hur phase, I may never understand.
Don't plan to vote at all... And I'm sticking with that plan. The system is broken.
you forget to mention 50 new nuclear power plants that should have been geothermal power stations. you forget to mention that obama calls biofeuls green and renewable. You forget to mention that obama is sold out to wall street.
There are a lot more reasons, i think we need to get on the wiki and list them.
If all you do is keep trying here, then i'm quitting. I am sick of the trolling bs, sick of working alone without the people who ought to be my allies, and sick of trying to make sense for the idiots over and over and over again on issue like these. We need to make a giant central list of the many crimes of obama, not enough space to even fit that here.
Get on the wiki. get to work. Or I'm out, because this is all of it fucking lame.
http://occupythiswiki.org/wiki/Article_5_Convention
http://occupythiswiki.org/wiki/THE_99%25_POLITICAL_PARTY
http://occupywallst.org/forum/im-quitting-unless-you-all-start-working-stay-the-/
have i stumbled into a nest of conspiracy theorists?
the attack on libya wasn't unconstitutional. i'm sorry to say dennis kucinich was wrong. the power of congress does not trump the UN security council, because the UN charter is a treaty. read the constitution's supremacy clause in article 6. it takes precedence over the need to declare war. what obama did is not what bush did. bush committed aggression. obama followed international law.
politifact is tracking 508 campaign promises. as of now obama has kept 159, compromised on 49, broken 54. 66 are rated stalled, 178 in the works, and 2 are not rated. obamawatch says 137 honored, 42 broken, 40 hedged, 69 stalled, and 220 in the works.
but none of that really matters, does it? and it's not about ending the fed, either. what counts is who will tax the 1%. i think we all know which party that is and which one will do everything they can to block it.
dems want to help folk in need. gops just feed greed.
I stand firmly with my trust in Dennis Kucinich.
i like him too, and i also hate war, but he was wrong about this. read the supremacy clause. then read articles 25 and 49 of the UN charter.
Obama and the Democrats have been disappointing, though they might have some excuse in that Republicans hindered some of their better ideas. (Though, for example, I see no excuse for them not to have reversed the Bush tax cuts in early 2009 and used the money to benefit the middle class through education subsidies and/or targeted tax cuts) Even so, we have to remember what kind of nightmare the Republicans want. If we had voted McCain:
Georgia would likely have been invited into NATO. When their troops got into a shooting war with Russian troops in South Ossetia over a stolen bicycle, the U.S. and Europe would have been committed to the position that that region, consisting of 90% Russian citizens, claimed by Russia, was NATO territory, and that we were honor bound to "defend" it. What might have happened?
We would probably be at war with Iran. And Iraq, controlled by a sympathetic Shi'ite minority no longer complying with the electoral games we've set up to try to keep them from controlling their government. And Afghanistan. Probably not Pakistan though since bin Laden would still be running around loose. Maybe Egypt, depending on how well we could prop up Mubarak. And all those countries would be getting together, coordinating their resistance, undermining our allies. We could be losing the war entirely, and we might well be subject to an oil embargo or blockade that would have gas up to $7 a gallon.
We would have even less progress on renewable energy, fuel efficiency, and global warming. More progress on free drilling for international corporations to spill oil on America's best tourist beaches.
Unquestionably there would be no chance for gays in the military. Maybe the Republicans could cook up some kind of draft program to make up the gap in recruitment.
Abortion would still be legal. The GOP continues to provide its core base with the opportunity to assuage their consciences by ensuring two things: that they always promise to ban abortion, and that they never do so. This can never change.
The FICA tax cut would never have happened. The government would have cheerfully collected the larger amount of money from the middle class, "borrowed" it to pay general fund expenses. Then the IRS could make some ruling to trim the taxes for the wealthy with the excess. And without a plan to repay the money, it would have no effect on Republican discussions about how Social Security was insolvent and could be fixed only by further cutting health care for the elderly.
In no means does my post suggest John McCain would have been better. It's tiring to see so many people say that in response to my anti-Obama campaign. Kucinich should have been the democratic nominee in 2007 and took office in 2008. But people vote for the corporate owned media advertised corporate and banker backed candidates. Most people vote based on television.
And if Nader had not put his name on the ballot in FL, none of this would have happened, we can do something, or not, it really is that simple, I wish none of this was happening but that doesn't mean we should let the GOP get even stronger, we could crush them if we were not so divided and then we really could have a new party, but these false starts where we don't take down one of the major parties to make room for ours, just helps the GOP as it did in 2000, nothing Bush did, could of been done without the help of Nader.
Go to this site to find a blog to peddle your Obama 2012
http://www.blogs.com/topten/10-popular-obama-blogs/
This is OWS.
BOTH PARTIES WORK FOR THE 1% and WAR
I don't normally mention "karma score" but since you seem so sure that you speak for this community, I would like to point out that your score was around 200 higher than me, when we met, I see that has changed over the past couple of weeks. I never suggest anyone go anywhere else, I believe that only by having vigorous debate can we determine the best path to achieve our goals.
I believe, “This is what democracy looks like.”
You may not like what democracy is saying, but a lot of people don’t, esp. those in the 1%, but I don’t urge you to leave, stay, defend your position, this is a movement where each person decides for themselves, because that’s what democracy looks like.
I have never seen anyone but you in OWS or on this webstie that blames it on Nader and people that think 3rd party options are better than D's and R's. Well maybe Jiffy Squid.
But think what you want. All I can tell you is if you think like that and you're blaming anti-war liberals... you're not being very productive.
This would not be the first time that I have stood alone in the room telling truth.
Truth has no friends.
Let me go off the deep end here because I like you trevor, but I want you to know how disappointed I was.
Gore would have been the “Jesus” to Clinton's “John the Baptist” to me. There, they can tear me up now, but maybe you have not taken the time to think what might have been. I lived it, not to see it torn away by the lies they always say, but by lies told by someone I loved who had always told the truth. So you could say, when I think of what we lost because of third party ego, the banking crap seems small.
only if the imaginary numbers controlling commerce are disregarded
the banks are a problem for the decades, climate change is for the centuries
the last two centuries since the industrial revolution
think what you want. All I can tell you is if you're blaming liberals who oppose wars... you're not being productive.
How many countries has Obama bombed? Say no to all warmongers. Even if they wear a D.
wars are bad, OWS is fundamentally about wealth/money in politics, that's just my opinion but it is why I come here, if those who oppose war then feel they should encourage people to either not vote or vote for neither of the two big parties, I feel that moves OWS farther from it's goals and makes it work harder to achieve it’s goals, that is what I have always said
All day, unless you can get Bill Maher to run.
I like Maher, he’s just a little naive.
Come up with something better! We'll join.
So you Liberals that want to continue living in an "Entitlement" country how do you think that is to be funded? By the shrinking private sector and higher taxes???? Do you really think only the rich will pay those higher taxes? Think again as there are always loop holes added into bills that the government and our president include that are passed into law!!!!
Entitlement is a guy at the top who runs the bank account thinks he's owed all the money. The fact is, he's the guy in charge of the bank account and he's abusing his title. Even John Walsh thinks they're pigs. And yes tax loop holes are fucked and so is the president. A ton of people in his administration are former big wigs from big wall street banks like Goldman Sachs and many more.
Try and argue with John Walsh about entitlement you dick.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=-dEFVrzeAj8
From what i see, 80% of this OWS people will vote for Obama....america is doomed...but thats ok il be laughing all the way LOL!!
yeah its kind of odd. It's almost like they forgot what OWS is about. They forget that Obama 100% supported the tarp bailouts for Wall Street banks.
[Removed]
If 1 percent OBM made the same pledge as Ron Lawl to reduce his salary, I wouldn't hesitate one minute!
"[Paul] is a man who would eliminate five of the 15 cabinet-level departments (Commerce, Education, Energy, Housing and Urban Development, and Interior – he has no problem reciting them all); recall American troops from all foreign lands, not just war zones; repeal the 16th Amendment, which created the federal income tax; reduce his own presidential salary from $400,000 to $39,336 – the median salary of an American worker."
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2011/12/10/ron-paul-proposes-interes_n_1140723.html?ref=mostpopular
[Removed]
The GOP jobs plan is simple enough for dependent class OWSers to understand: get rid of laws, red tape, taxes, surcharges and all other government created road blocks that prevent the creation and expansion of capitalism.
Not necessarily, but true on some aspects. The GOP has put a lot in place that fuck the people in the ability to compete with big business. While it may cost some money for big business, it's set in place so the little guy can't afford it and compete. If you want to know what to cut, vote RonPaul in 2012.
To vote for Obama again would be to vote for the same lies they bought the first go around. He has not kept his word on anything he said he would do. Time to give someone else a chance to lie to us or tell us the truth. If they do the same thing, out the door they will go.
somewhere else on this page i posted some numbers on obama campaign promises. politifact and obamawatch don't agree on how many he kept. one says 159, the other says 137. i think that actually means he has kept his word on some things he said he would do. sorry to have to contradict you.
Most of what he followed through on was not the reason I voted for him. All of his lies were the reason I voted for him. Well back then they were promises. 3 years later and they're lies and he's pussyfooting around real issues.
It's symantics. Yes, he kept his promis that he would do things, but what he ultimatly produced or enacted was not in the form in which he said it would be. He kept his promise to do it, but not in the way or with the results that it ended up.
i disagree. you're overgeneralizing. read the details on politifact. i suspect you're holding him to an unrealistic standard. the reality of politics is power. power comes from support. those of us that voted for him sat back after 2008 and waited to see him do magic. we failed to give him enough public support to overcome opposition, so he was forced to compromise and even to yield. considering all that, he's accomplished plenty. it's not semantics. it's politics.
I would like Obama to lead by example: forfeit his $400K annual salary, after all with his book royalties, he is a multi-millionnaire, announce that he and his family will stay at home this year, like millions of Americans who are unable to pay for the necessities of life, let alone for a Christmas vacation on the beaches of Hawaii, and then, maybe, maybe, I'll reconsider my vote for him.
You're a fraud as well & an idiot. Please note that OWS realizes we need to vote Obama 2012! PLUS WE will get rid of all GOP candidates @ city, state & national level! WHY? Because we need democracy NOW!
Speak for yourself clown, OWS sees both parties the problem and that is obama as well. learn whats been going on and how they help it.
Yes Blue Dog & other Dems are just as responsible for this mess! But you know...I want my country back so I am investing in a plan to take America back from lobbyists & corporate greed!
I'm one of many in OWS, and I won't vote for Obama in 2012...speak for yourself. The 1% are using both Democrat and Republican; left and right; to advance their totalitarian corporate agenda. Clearly this stealth tactic can overwhelm the 99%.
I'm an idiot for posting the truth?
Go fuck yourself with that ignorant attitude. No more response for you. OWS does not support any candidate. No more lies.
Yes you're an idiot get over it!
I've learned that those who remain loyal to Obama are not influenced by facts, reality, or truth. Virtually nothing can break the spell.
You are right that Obama seemed offer more hope to many who've waited a long time to get a progressive president, but has not delivered enough change (maybe cause congress has blocked him last 2 years, and the economy was worse than we all realized) and many people still like Obama, cause he's better than anyone else at the National level. who would you rather see at the top and have to live with for 4 years? Obama or Gingrich/Romney. like (Gore or Bush) like Ralph Nader got in and tipped Florida to Bush. Nobody internally will be able to challenge Obama in the Dem party. I'd like for Obama to stand more for the people, somehow, stand up a lot more. Therefore, we need to get candidates in at the more grassroots level who can work up into the system, like the TEA party did. We can run candidates at the local, state and national (congress) level, and there are some national figures for 2016 (Bernie Sanders) But unless all the campaign dollars get taken out of the system, it's like a catch 22, how will these progressive candidates win, when corporations can shovel as much money as they wish. Obama's not perfect by any means, but at least he is not Bush or Gingrich, making us the laughing stock of the world, and wreaking our economy, environment, and sticking us in wars all over the world.Obama should've been more of a progresive leader, and it does feel like now his proclomations are too little too late. Change needs to come from the bottom up, I believe. I agree many Obama people don't seem to swayed by some of the facts, because if the right wing wins senate and white house, we're probably be going off to Iran, and N. Korea, maybe other places like Pakistan. They just want to have wars, and drill everywhere for oil, and make sure the rich people get more tax breaks. It seems like there is little way out, except to overwhelm the system like the Tea party group did, and have a huge impact in the elections, and get common sense back into the system. the hard part is the TEA part had a lot of money backing them up, and FOX news
I'd lke to have a better response to your post; but after reading it; I was assured that you are one still locked within the Obama spell; and facts, reality, and truth will not influence you as regards Obama.
This incredulous statement of yours, provided the evidence; "Obama's not perfect by any means, but at least he is not Bush or Gingrich, making us the laughing stock of the world, and wreaking our economy, environment, and sticking us in wars all over the world.". No ...now we're not the laughing stock; we're the globally feared and hated. No hard feelings but as I stated Obama supporters cannot cut through the smoke, mirrors and psyops to find facts, truth or reality...they just can't...nor can they be helped.
i'm not locked in by obama's spell. i liked Hillary more, but had to go with Obama as he won the primary. Obama, I believe, should have worked more strongly towards a single-payer health care, and not given in to the health-care corporations. Obama should have done something more to help the housing situation, and to get the country working. I think we should be out or Iraq and Afghanistan. He should disavow corporate campaign financing and align himself with OWS positions.
Obama stll is the lesser of the two evils. So unless OWS runs a candidate,because I don't want to have oil rigs all over the place, and trust the repubs less, I gotta hold my nose continue with him. however I am starting to agree with some of ron lol's positions, such as not fighting all over the world, i don't think he could win as a 3rd party, I like Bernie Sanders more. No Obama's not perfect. I agree. do you have a better option?
I'm not following the lesser of two evils any more...it doesn't work. It's why we are, where we find ourselves. One strategy that I'm looking at is to see what candidates the corporate mediate, attacks, rejects and eliminates from the debates. If the media of the 1% are eliminating and fearful of a candidate; that candidate bears serious consideration. If mainstream media is branding a candidate as too extreme, that may be an indicator of a candidate that has an anti-fascist agenda. I will seriously research and consider that candidate, even if mainstream corporatist media brands the candidate as unelectable and extremist.
No, I will not return a president for a second term, once he has been proven to be a puppet , liar, fascist, and murderer...even if the next president could be worse.
Unfortunately, I believe the American people prefer presidential candidates and politicians, that reinforce and sustain the status quo, which is why we will return proven criminals to presidential office.
I firmly believe the real problem is we the 99%.
I listen to and agree with what you say. I honor your standing your ground, too, on not returning for a second term, puppets, etc. The difficult part is the way the system is now, it takes a lot of money to run a political campaign. Currently, one guy running for pres, a former Louisiana governor, was speaking out against corporate campaign money corrupting the system. (I only saw him a couple times on "MSNBC" The mainstream republicans wouldn't let him into to the debates, because he had not enough raised campaign funds, if I recall. Yea we've got ourselves to blame, as we think one side other in going to fix everything. It is us, who have let ourselves be duped too long. Thanks for your remarks.
If you were the parents of these children, would you vote a second term for Obama ? http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WsBowB8SCoQ&feature=related NATO & rebel crimes in Libya against innocent children (VIEWER DISCRETION ADVISED)
Is it wise to settle for a president who continues a policy of assassination without due process....really what does it take ? Rhetorical qestions...take care. bye.
USA vs. USA: Killing Americans abroad http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8Pk88A8a8EM
I would agree. My mom tries to justify all his crap with "but he's trying the best he can."
I will not be fooled by Obama for a second term. I voted for him once and he turned out to be George W. Obama.
Obama will win the 2012 elections. He is the perfect puppet for the Republicans. He does every thing they want with the added benefit of allowing the Republicans to blame the Democrats for their mess. I have nothing to back this up but I'm fairly certain, behind the scenes, Republicans are doing all they can to keep Obama in Office.
[Removed]
He's bombed more countries than Bush.
He extended the Bush tax cuts.
He never actually closed guantanamo bay.
Those three make me think maybe I WILL vote for him. But the rest stink, and so does he. Don't blame me, I never voted for him. But I am not one of the sheeple.
I guess if you approve of world war, bombing a ton of countries is a good thing. We're starting to piss off Russia, and China isn't a fan of the warships we have getting too close to their country. Sure we're not going to do anything to them, but you'd have to admit, you'd be paranoid if China had warships nearing our borders in the ocean.
In my opinion if we'd restore constitutional authority to the monetary system, every single bit of taxes could be cut. But without abolishing the federal reserve, we need higher taxes... I consider myself a die hard liberal but I'm still voting RonPaul because I think he's the only guy who isn't a fraud that running for president that has a chance at winning.
If any republican/conservative had half a brain, they'd vote Ronny P over Newt.
All bullshit. No Romney. No Gengrich...no Republican! Obama is the only option. Unless of course you can come up top-of-class at Harvard! Abortion is not an issue. Let it go.
First of all of course No Romney No Gingrich. And actually my post about Obama is all fact.
Obama is a fraud.
Wall Street's takeover of the Obama administration is now complete.
"The mega-banks and their corporate allies control every economic policy position of consequence. Mr. Obama has moved rapidly since the November debacle to install business people where it counts most. Mr.William Daley from JP Morgan Chase as White House Chief of Staff. Mr. Gene Sperling from the Goldman Sachs payroll to be director of the National Economic Council. Eileen Rominger from Goldman Sachs named director of the SEC's Investment Management division. Even the National Security Advisor, Thomas Donilon, was executive vice president for law and policy at the disgraced Fannie Mae after serving as a corporate lobbyist with O'Melveny & Roberts. The keystone of the business friendly team was put in place on Friday. General Electric Chairman and CEO Jeffrey Immelt will serve as chair of the president's Council on Jobs and Competitiveness."
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/michael-brenner/barack-obama-out-of-the-c_b_813027.html
Yet more evidence that Obama is a fraud and holds none of your interests. THEY let you get a little bit so you think he's on your side. Remember this is the guy who supported giving hundreds of billions continually to Wall Street banks. Then they used our tax payer dollars to create 7.7 trillion dollars out of thin air. It's all a fraud. The whole time it was happening congressmen were using the info for insider trading. It's all a scam to extract the wealth from our country and turn the middle class into peasants.
I am ashamed of voting for Obama. Sell out! I'll do it again unless you can come up with someone better. Or shut the fuck up.
Wow what an adult attitude. You should be proud. I thought liberals were supposed to be more open minded. You sound no different than an arrogant fool.
I am not a liberal. Douche! I am more conservative than Regan. The difference is, I am educated! No Bedtime for Bonzo!
The thing I hate the most about Obama is his lies. I may not have supported him, but I would at least respect him if he would follow through with what he says he will do. Instead, I do not respect the liar.
More Proof Bushbama is a Puppet of the Kleptocracy:
United Technologies: Black Hawks for Brunei & Billions from a Boondoggle http://corporategreedchronicles.com/2011/11/25/united-technologies-black-hawks-for-brunei-billions-from-a-boondoggle/
Occupy Australia! Bushbama trades unearned Nobel Peace Prize for Salesman-of-the-Year Trophy from U.S. Defense Contractors http://corporategreedchronicles.com/2011/11/18/occupy-australia-bushbama-trades-unearned-nobel-peace-prize-for-salesman-of-the-year-trophy-from-u-s-defense-contractors/
Chevron Oil: Big Boat for Condi, Big Bucks for Bushbama http://corporategreedchronicles.com/2011/11/25/chevron-oil-big-boat-for-condi-big-bucks-for-bushbama/
Newt Rocks!
why do you spell it "ro-" instead of "su-"?
All you retards that are going to vote for Obama are part of the problem if you support that POS then WTF are you doing supporting OWS? And no I'm not saying vote republican. A vote for either party is a vote for the status quo. It means you like the direction this country is going and you want more of it.
president Obama supported the god damn tarp bailouts. Do any of these OWS obama lovers know what OWS is about?
I'm beginning to wonder. And don't forget that his butt buddy Immelts corporation pays no taxes and sends jobs out of the country.
On December 6, 2011, a day that will live in infamy, the treasonous jackals of the United States Senate declared war on the American people by approving S1867, the Defense Authorization Act, which authorizes the military to indefinitely suspend the Habeas Corpus rights of Americans, and essentially repeals the Posse Comitatus Act of 1878. On this date, the United States of America ceased to exist.
Last week we convened an emergency teleconference with Occupy Site Mayors representing 57 occupied cities in the USA. Our decision follows.
Barack Obama cannot be trusted to veto S1867. He has been corrupted by the Supreme Court’s Citizen’s United Decision. We must begin what Al Gore should have started when GW Bush stole the 2000 election in Florida. We must begin what John Kerry should have started when GW Bush stole the 2004 election in Ohio. We must start a new Government in Exile.
We cannot protest for power. We cannot petition for power. We cannot beg for power. Power belongs to those who can take it. For every member of the Senate, we will appoint our own interim senators. For every member of the House of Representatives, we will appoint our own interim representatives. For every member of the Supreme Court, we will appoint our own interim judges. After we get organized, we will invite all Americans to vote in a general election for each position, including my Presidential seat, through an Internet website.
We understand that people living in the South, Central States, and West Coast don’t trust East Coasters. So we will locate our capital in Lebanon, Kansas, the geographic center of the contiguous 48 states. Then we will start legislating. Democracy works from the bottom up. If our recommendations are good for the people, they will follow us. Washington DC will become superfluous. We will cut Washington DC off from the bow of our ship, like a snagged anchor, and let it sink to the bottom of the Atlantic Ocean.
Nothing you say matters at all until you stop using Mr. Feingold's name. I don't usually resort to name-calling but, I'm just saying what kind of ignorant jerk does that? He's a public figure and I'm sure you don't represent him.
Do you think there is only one person in the world named Russel Feingold? Look in the phone book. Who is your RF?
"We will cut Washington DC off from the bow of our ship, like a snagged anchor, and let it sink to the bottom of the Atlantic Ocean."
.........before or after they bomb you, and arrest all involved as domestic terrorists. Unless police and miltary sign up...we're not going anywhere sadly.
Any organized system of belief as "religion" is a sum of its parts; there is a huge difference between those Muslims christianized by default in America, and those of foreign nations and cultures.
We are not demonizing American Muslims, only Middle Eastern Muslims, and ShiTites in particular.
Nope
doesn't matter if you're an American muslim or a foreign one. in order to be a good muslims to have to believe in and followe the koran, the koran says to "kill the non believer wherver you find him". islam is the cancer of the civilized world ever since it was invented in the 7th century.
I don't believe you'll find those born and raised here are willing to follow that mandate.
wrong, again, a good muslim is one that follows the koran. the koran is a political system. try leaving islam and you're an apostate, one maked to be killed. Ever hear of honor killings? they go on in the USA by muslims done to members of their own families.
The only cure is to restore our first Constitution and common law, with a few minor tweaks.
Does that require a successful third party?
Well, I know that Dr. PauI's intention has been to make this happen, possibly even wipe the entire slate clean back to the late 1800's, although many Constitutional Scholars are certain that there hasn't been a "legal" amendment to the Constitution, since 1812.
Major house keeping and regrouping, even our entire court system will have to go and replace them with Article III common law courts.
I have my doubts as to if ALL THE PEOPLE, with even a thusly motivated and determined President in the Whitehouse will be able to ever restore our original form of governance. Those holding the note on the two bankruptcies which lead up to where we are now, will not likely be easily convinced and would most likely use deadly force to prevent such. My opinion. Dr. PauI supporters are already on the "domestic terrorist" lists, as I am reasonably sure Dr Paul is as well.
Sir or Mam U are right. I know for a fact im on some list. and I know Paul is.
All posting here are as well, unless they are working from the inside.
Why not just do the all American thing and sue those holding the note. Ok sorry for being facetious but given the situation on planet earth at the dawn of the 21st century maybe this can be negotiated? I have difficulty wrapping my brain around this but I'm assuming your concerns are genuine and I am trying.
I am thinking just telling them GFY and null their claims in a court of common law if they decide to bring one.
Seriously, study the terms of which FDR signed off on in 1933. They are deplorable pure evil, yet, hidden in plain sight.
which ones, in your mind, are evil?
Why? Are you studied in the matter and do not believe any are?
i'm no expert, but i'm not totally ignorant either. if there was something "FDR signed off on in 1933" that was evil, how come i don't know of it? fill me in. and while you're at it, what's your source?
It was the reorganization of the 1871 bankruptcy resulting from the still unpaid civil war debt and the terms were most unsavory. Sources? Mostly history books printed prior to 1960, many of which have had the pertinent info published online, as well as official government archives also found online to make it easy enough for anyone curious, to see for themselves.
Basically, in the 1871 BK, all federally owned land was handed over as collateral and defaulted upon, this is why foreign entities own all our national parks and other similar biospheres.......
dig a bit and see if you can find what else was made soon to be defaulted upon collateral in 1933 and also see if you can find the terms of payments, specifically as relates to interest payments, and then we'll chat some more.
See if you can determine who is holding these debt instruments. Most everyone knows, intuitively, but to read it in black and white does tend to make today's mayhem, much more understandable. Searching for the root causes and finding them is a good thing.
you've got an overactive imagination, and it's getting manipulated by a bunch of conspiracy theory nutjobs.
You doubt anything I typed? Geeze, it's well documented fact, unless you attended a school prohibited from teaching history as it actually happened.
well documented fact? "believing in bullshit don't make it real." you want to be on the lunatic fringe, that's your privilege, by all means. someday you might be another glenn beck or lyndon larouche. have fun.
btw, i went to school mostly before 1960. if we'd been taught that crap, i'd recall it.
but you're the guy that wants to go back to the "first constitution" (whatever that means). where DID you go to school, anyway? looks like your history text was a hoax put over on you.
I can't help it reality appears to you as crap, even to the point that you remain so certain today, that actually learning historical facts seems preposterous.
http://www.barefootsworld.net/consti16.html
what? i'm supposed to go thru that whole site till i find a point that proves me wrong? be specific.
btw, 1871 isn't on the first page there. how am i supposed to find your bankruptcies? and what about FDR in 1933?
i'm dying to know where you went to school. just name the state and say if it was public or private.
just do humanity a favor and die blissfully ignorant
and people like you will too, likely in internment camps kneeling at the guillotine
just a lil bone for your to nibble upon
"Article. VI.
All Debts contracted and Engagements entered into, before the Adoption of this Constitution, shall be as valid against the United States under this Constitution, as under the Confederation.
This Constitution, and the Laws of the United States which shall be made in Pursuance thereof; and all Treaties made, or which shall be made, under the Authority of the United States, shall be the supreme Law of the Land; and the Judges in every State shall be bound thereby, any Thing in the Constitution or Laws of any State to the Contrary notwithstanding.
The Senators and Representatives before mentioned, and the Members of the several State Legislatures, and all executive and judicial Officers, both of the United States and of the several States, shall be bound by Oath or Affirmation, to support this Constitution; but no religious Test shall ever be required as a Qualification to any Office or public Trust under the United States. "
This is what makes the 1789 document a bankruptcy pact, to find details and specifics, you have to dig, I'm not doing it for your hillbilly backwoods educated fool self.
http://www.gpoaccess.gov/coredocs.html
Soon to be retired above, although missing a few key documents easily found elsewhere.
http://www.gpo.gov/fdsys/
The new one.
Waybackmachine and archives of the Libraries of Congress are helpful.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=e-3hZsXrxaI
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4mkRFCtl2MI
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1SQqjTxI3vc
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EewGMBOB4Gg
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4Z9WVZddH9w
http://thezeitgeistmovement.com/
http://blog.thezeitgeistmovement.com/
http://www.thevenusproject.com/
I am starting to warm towards Romney but I have not been a fan in the past. I read the article in the NYT this morning about his frugality and his actions in the business world and this is making me think he might be a good candidate who will cut spending. Gingrich is smart but really waffles on his thinking.
Unfortunately, I think Obama gets re-elected and we are in for below average GDP growth unitil probably mid decade.
Romney supports racial profiling.
I have no idea whether he does or not, please expound.
He said that he supports racial profiling in a debate a few weeks ago. As well as herman cain, bachmann, gingrich, and santorum.
I'm assuming for terrorism defense?
If so that doesn't bother me.
wow. yeah because all brown people commit terrorism. Timothy McVeigh was a white guy. Should we racially profile white people too?
Absolutely, we should profile white people if they are a threat to the defense of the nation. If people don't want to be profiled don't break the law and kill Americans. It's pretty simple.
Profile everyone! Police state! TSA patrols on every corner. Police state! Imprison everyone for 30 days while they do background checks! Police state!!! Let's delete the constitution for a police state!!!
I am very much against a police state. Profiling is a very nice tool in finding likely terrorists. It has been used by France for many years and has kept the terrorists at bay there.
I am for limiting the power of the police and the government and getting them out of people's lives, including there bed room. Self defense is one are that government should do but this needs to be made more efficient and face competition.
We certainly need self defense. We also need policing. And thank you for saying "getting them out of people's lives". The move to militarize the police is very disturbing. I'm not sure at what point we decided it was okay to micromanage and legislate away daily life choices, but it has gone too far. Profiling is a useful tool, but before action is taken it must be accompanied by more concrete (or extremely compelling circumstantial) evidence.
profile the people that fit the profile of what you're looking for.
no thanks. This country has had enough bigotry. You know Shaq is a muslim right?
if he get on plane and starts yelling allahu akbar, i want him taken off the plane.