Welcome login | signup
Language en es fr

Forum Post: Obama=Romney=Establishment Duopoly=Warmongers

Posted 9 years ago on Feb. 19, 2012, 12:26 p.m. EST by hchc (3297) from Tampa, FL
This content is user submitted and not an official statement

When will the people of the USA wake up and start creating other options?

Who the hell votes for only two parties in a nation of 300million?

Are we too dumb to fail?



Read the Rules
[-] 5 points by nucleus (3291) 9 years ago

Rocky Anderson


I will not vote for any corporate candidates.

[-] 2 points by debndan (1145) 9 years ago

That's the first I've heard of him, interesting to move beyond the obama/romney paradigm

Though in my defense I didn't support Obama in 2008


[-] 4 points by bensdad (8977) 9 years ago

nice slogan
not true
dumb premise

[-] -3 points by hchc (3297) from Tampa, FL 9 years ago

As our quality of life will continue to erode over the next 20 yrs, you will see that I was right.

Getting worse and too dumb to change it.

[-] 6 points by bensdad (8977) 9 years ago

get the money out of politics and things will improve
you disagree ?

[-] -1 points by OTP (-203) from Tampa, FL 8 years ago

Where are the politicians signing onto MTA?

Where the fuck are they Bensdad?!!

Where are they?

This is the issue that 80% of the public supports. This is the issue. This is the champion issue for hack politicians.

Where the fuck are they?

[-] 1 points by bensdad (8977) 8 years ago

our web site has everything you need to understand the issue
take your time.
understanding the truth can be very difficult for
some types of people


[-] 1 points by OTP (-203) from Tampa, FL 8 years ago

Is is difficult for you to understand that almost 0 Democrats have signed onto MTA?

[-] -1 points by hchc (3297) from Tampa, FL 9 years ago

You can have federally funded elections, but if the people are still willing to vote for the D/R elitists choices, does it matter?

Put Obama and Romney on federally funded budgets. ITs still Obama vs Romney.

[-] 1 points by bensdad (8977) 9 years ago

I know I seem very pro-Obama. I am not.
But the issue is not how pissed I am at him or the system

The issue is America
Many of us, in the anti-Vietnam war movement were ready for violence, but we decided that would be bad for America. ( unfortunately Chicago proved us right )
It may be very satisfying to slap Obama by not voting for him.
It might make you feel better.
But it will not make America better.
Satisfaction? or a better America?

These four men REQUIRE that you vote for Obama

John Roberts +
Antonin Scalia +
Clarence Thomas +
Samuel Alito

If you don’t believe them,
…….ask Newt Gingrich or John McCain about Citizens United
…….ask the family of any soldier killed in Iraq about bush v Gore


Are you afraid to
……tell me why supreme court appointments make no difference ?

If you cannot see the difference between the democrats and the Rs –
.……and believe that President Gore would invade Iraq, or NOT read his PDBs –
…………..………………………………………………..you are blind

If you want to do what Davis & Lee failed to do
……………..……………………………………….…….you are crazy

[-] 1 points by hchc (3297) from Tampa, FL 9 years ago

Gore didnt seem to mind Clinton bombing people. And most of that little club voted for Iraq too, dumbass.

Its all the same club. They're in it. Youre not.

[-] 1 points by hchc (3297) from Tampa, FL 9 years ago

If you cannot see the difference between the democrats and the Rs – .……and believe that President Gore would invade Iraq, or NOT read his PDBs –

Thats pretty funny

[-] 4 points by jph (2652) 9 years ago

yup,. two sides to one corporate military fascist party,. this is the great "American way". Voting for either side of that coin will change very little.

[-] 1 points by WatTyler (263) 9 years ago

Sure it will, it will determine which corporatist sock puppet gets to dole out patronage.

[-] 2 points by turbocharger (1756) 6 years ago

Duopoly working like a charm still. Debate tomorrow should be puke worthy as were the Republican ones so far.

[-] 2 points by gsw (3380) from Woodbridge Township, NJ 8 years ago



here is an important site you should see http://www.cusdi.org/index.html

pretty detailed plan

woops,.. thought was in PM well look when you have time

[-] 2 points by gnomunny (6819) from St Louis, MO 8 years ago

hchc now goes by the username OTP.

[-] 2 points by gsw (3380) from Woodbridge Township, NJ 8 years ago

really. then he's seen it.

you're welcome to see it too. we're open source here

[-] 2 points by gnomunny (6819) from St Louis, MO 8 years ago

I've seen it. In fact I have it bookmarked, but haven't had the chance to read thru it yet.

[-] 2 points by gsw (3380) from Woodbridge Township, NJ 8 years ago

Pretty intense stuff

[-] 2 points by gnomunny (6819) from St Louis, MO 8 years ago

Yes, it looks promising. In fact, my state is one of the 16 that have direct constitutional initiatives

[-] 2 points by gsw (3380) from Woodbridge Township, NJ 8 years ago

My state too. Legislators are busy with budgets, schools, so I may have to put this on

ballot here.

Maybe a lawyer should look at it first.


[-] 1 points by factsrfun (8300) from Phoenix, AZ 9 years ago

First you have to make the Republicans so weak they can't take over when we bust the Demorcrates into to get the party we need.

[-] 1 points by Spade2 (478) 9 years ago

Really? Did Carter = Reagan? Did Gore = Bush? Apparently yes

[-] 1 points by hchc (3297) from Tampa, FL 9 years ago

Um, Gore was VP while Clinton bombed quite a few countries. If you think he's not another yes man, then you are still living in a political paradise.

Im not too familiar with Carter or Reagan. Cant say.

[-] 1 points by Spade2 (478) 9 years ago

Ah, so you see the Kosovo and Libya bombings as aggression and illigal. How can you, when the people of these countries are better off than before?

[-] 1 points by hchc (3297) from Tampa, FL 9 years ago

Tell that to the thousands that lost loved ones, you hypocrite.

[-] 1 points by Spade2 (478) 9 years ago

And they wouldn't have lost them to the aggressors? All wars have casualties but these places are better then they were before.

[-] 0 points by factsrfun (8300) from Phoenix, AZ 9 years ago

So ypu can't tell the difference between Clinton and Bush? because they both dropped bombs. If this is true why should we trust you to chose between two policies to know which is best? decieing things don't seem to be your strong suit.

[-] 1 points by TrevorMnemonic (5827) 9 years ago

The Obama administration has been a continuation of the Bush war legacy. For anyone who doesn't want to believe that, watch this video

The only thing is, it's taken much longer than 5 years

Listen closely to the countries named


[-] 1 points by BlackSun (275) from Agua León, BC 9 years ago

No, we are NOT too dumb to fail. The vast majority have been perfectly content to vote for only one of two parties. And they will continue to vote for those two parties. Hell, most of the regular posters here still believe the democrats are better than the republicans. Too many Americans are stupid.

[-] 1 points by JesseHeffran (3903) 9 years ago

Just out of curiousness, what would a sage like you suggest as a remedy to my stupidity? If I am stupid because I believe Democrats make for a better vote, then what would an all intelligent person like you do differently?

[-] 2 points by nobnot (529) from Kapaa, HI 9 years ago

To begin with stop wasting your time.Maybe you might also want to stop rewarding bad behavior .Remember two wrongs do not make a right.

[-] 1 points by JesseHeffran (3903) 9 years ago

well, I'd say that the Tea Party don't believe they wasted their time. I'm just saying. You know, those who say it is a waste of time to participate come off as those who are making a killing participating. What pork has your fellow constituency received? I believe the silent majority are the destroyers of our Republic. Again, just saying...

[-] 2 points by nobnot (529) from Kapaa, HI 9 years ago

It is a waste of time to vote for someone who has been preselected and is given a script to follow once in.It is a waste of time to belive this two party system any longer serves the majority of the American people.It is not a waste of time to try to fix our country but that change Will NOT happen at a Ballot box.

[-] -1 points by BlackSun (275) from Agua León, BC 9 years ago

Break the strangle-hold on power that the two parties have. But never mind. Yes, you are unintelligent. But so are 300 million others. Vote for your party. Vote for the status quo.

[-] 1 points by JesseHeffran (3903) 9 years ago

Well, thank you for showing me who the dumb ass on this post is. Hey dumb ass, when sentences end with question marks they are to be answered. I see all your feeble mind is able to do is criticize and be little. I used to know people like you; then I grew up. good luck dumb ass. if you'd like to show me your intellectual prowess, then answer me this dumb ass, how'd you "Break the strangle-hold on power that the two parties have"?

[-] 1 points by hchc (3297) from Tampa, FL 9 years ago

Pray at night that the morons in this country wake the fuck up

[-] 1 points by MattLHolck (16833) from San Diego, CA 9 years ago

online petitions that can be verified publicly

[-] -2 points by BlackSun (275) from Agua León, BC 9 years ago

Sigh....yeah, you got the answers.....

[-] 2 points by JesseHeffran (3903) 9 years ago

Well, I don't have all the answers But it looks like my batting average is better than yours. here is a tip: practice makes perfect. how about you begin with answering my question. Matt was able to do it and his suggestion sounds brilliant, how about you giving it a try.

[-] -1 points by BlackSun (275) from Agua León, BC 9 years ago

An online petition is "brilliant"? Really? Oh yeah. That will bring about change. You are a cliche. Go away stupid.

[-] 2 points by JesseHeffran (3903) 9 years ago

But I have yet seen a solution come out of your feeble mind. What is wrong with your head? Is it full of disrespect and anguish because you were not loved as a child? Has life really been so bad to you that you can't think of solutions but only put down recommendations? sucks to be you.

[-] -2 points by BlackSun (275) from Agua León, BC 9 years ago

Cliche. Nothing but insults. Go away retard.



[-] 0 points by Skippy2 (485) 9 years ago

Vote out All incumbents!

[-] 2 points by hchc (3297) from Tampa, FL 9 years ago

And replace with more Dem and Rep warmongers?


[-] 0 points by epa1nter (4650) from Rutherford, NJ 9 years ago

I really like Anderson. And I hope he runs in the NEXT campaign, instead of being a spoiler in this upcoming one.

[-] 4 points by nucleus (3291) 9 years ago

Vote for the platform you like, not for who you imagine to be the lesser of evils. Not that our votes count, but it's worth a try.

[-] 0 points by epa1nter (4650) from Rutherford, NJ 9 years ago

I think our votes do count. And not ensuring the Democrat wins this time could have big consequences in terms of the Supreme Court, with Ginsburg due to retire (and possibly Breyer) a risk I strongly believe is not worth taking.

[-] 4 points by nucleus (3291) 9 years ago

Go ahead and keep imagining that Obama is on your side, and that any Supreme Court appointments are going to change a hard right court.

Obama's cabinet is staffed by GE and Goldman. He signed legislation that violates the constitution. He has us in more hot wars than any other president in history. I wouldn't vote for this corporate ass-licker if his GOP opponent was Hitler.

If you think your vote counts, you should use it to vote for the platform you believe in.

But before you put a lot of faith in your vote:

Clinton Curtis testimony on election rigging

[-] 1 points by epa1nter (4650) from Rutherford, NJ 9 years ago

I am as aware as anyone about Obama's record, you hyperbole notwithstanding. It is not for his legislation or policies that I would would vote. But right now the court is has a one person majority to the right. It's enough to have ushered in Citizen's United and thrown out the Walmart class action suit. But I'll be damned if I am willing to to see two MORE Scalia's on the court, which is exactly what we would have. That would become a 7-2 extreme right majority and would remain so for the rest of my natural life. If you think the court is hard right now, just wait to see if that happens. it would make today's court look like Pollyanna. Hitler is exactly who we would get. So I'm going to hold my nose and vote, not for Obama per se, but for a court that won't take away the last shred of rights I have. left. And whatever else he has done wrong, and they have been substantial and real wrongs, Obama's court appointments haven't been among them.

[-] 4 points by nucleus (3291) 9 years ago

Hitler would take away constitutional rights and violate the constitution. Oh, wait ... that's what BO did when he signed the NDAA.

[-] -1 points by epa1nter (4650) from Rutherford, NJ 9 years ago

You're a one trick pony. BOTH parties would have signed the NDAA. But only ONE would pack the court with fascists who would uphold and extend it, ensuring it is the law of the land through your grandchildren's lifetime. I know you don't think that's important (even though you hate the law). I do. I also think preserving Roe is important. I also think overturning Citizens United is important. I also think re-establishing the right to file class action discrimination suits again big corporations is important. You apparently don't. You are so consumed with rage at Obama that you can't see the dangers of allowing a Romney to take over.

[-] 1 points by CurveOfBindingEnergy (165) 9 years ago

Romney isn't going to be the GOP nominee ...

[-] 2 points by epa1nter (4650) from Rutherford, NJ 9 years ago

They are all nightmarish assholes.

[-] 1 points by nucleus (3291) 9 years ago

Both parties DID sign the NDAA, by overwhelming margins. Both parties, and the president, violated their oaths of office to protect and defend the constitution. That is treason. Treason is a capital offense. I won't vote for a traitor. If BO had vetoed, and been overridden by congress, maybe I would vote for him. But the only time he even pretends to stand up for citizens is when the campaign is on.

Of course voting is an exercise in futility, as citizens do not decide who the candidates are any more than they decide who the winners are.

Fuck the Supreme Court. Fuck the GOP. Fuck the Democrats. And fuck BO.

[-] 2 points by epa1nter (4650) from Rutherford, NJ 9 years ago

Fuck the Supreme Court? You don't have the power to. But IT has the power to fuck YOU. And that's the issue.

[-] 1 points by nucleus (3291) 9 years ago

The entire government has the power to screw you, and they are every day. BO just proposed dropping the corporate tax rate from 35% to 28%. That's a full 20% reduction, and does not even take into account that the average effective rate is around 21%.

And you're worried about the Supreme Court? LOL

[-] 0 points by epa1nter (4650) from Rutherford, NJ 9 years ago

First the tax rate drop is part f a proposal that also closes a bunch of loopholes, and might effective raise more, not less, revenue.

Second, yes, it is the Supreme Court that is at issue. You may not be aware of how critical that is, but that's your blind spot, not mine, and demonstrates a real lack of understanding of how government works.

[-] 1 points by nucleus (3291) 9 years ago

Keep on believing that electing corporate stooges who sign away your constitutional rights is on your best interest. The NDAA was not a Supreme Court decision.

The corporate tax proposal is 100% bullshit, pure campaign talk. Lower the rate (to please the right) and eliminate loopholes (to please the left). As if it would ever happen, and as if there would be any net difference in what corporations pay if it did ...

Time to wake up, dude. The number of politicians who care about citizens can be counted on one hand, and BO is NOT one of them. Voting for him is voting for indefinite detention without due process, Goldman Sachs, GE and multiple interminable wars in the middle east.

[-] 1 points by epa1nter (4650) from Rutherford, NJ 9 years ago

ROe v Wade was a SC Decision. Citizens United was a SP decision. The anti women WalMart ruling was a SC decision. NDAA could be overturned by the SC, if it was on the left instead of where it is now.

LOOK AT THE RULINGS. Look at how the ruling were split.

It is NOT an issue of whether or not a politician cares about you or me. It is about who he will put on the court. And that court has power over everyone's lives, and most aspects of our lives. If you don't see that, you are blind.

[-] 0 points by hchc (3297) from Tampa, FL 9 years ago

If you really like him then you would be willing to vote for him now.

Stop playing their lesser of two evils game. The change has to happen with someone.

[-] 2 points by epa1nter (4650) from Rutherford, NJ 9 years ago

Liking someone and opening the door to a completely fascist Supreme court are two different things. Splitting the vote will do precisely that.

The place to begin really making changes is on the local, not national level. It is the strategy the neo-conservatives and Christian right adopted and it worked. The left can do the same thing.

[-] 1 points by hchc (3297) from Tampa, FL 9 years ago

How did it work for the right?

They ended up with a bunch of fascists destroying the nation.

[-] 1 points by epa1nter (4650) from Rutherford, NJ 9 years ago

It work for the right in term of their having taken over most of local and state governments, and are always poised to field viable candidates for the senate, congress and presidency. They have ben able to push through all sorts of legislation that would have been unheard of 20 years ago.

As much as they have been able to put in place for the sake of fascism, we can put in place for the left. It is by abdicating and ceding the PROCESS to the right that we have allowed the country to get into the crisis it's in now. It is why the Democrats have become, essentially, moderate republicans, while the republicans has becomes fascists.

[-] 1 points by hchc (3297) from Tampa, FL 9 years ago


You need to take not one step back, but about 30 steps back and look at this.

From Clinton and the Dems (along with R) repealing Glass steagall in 1999, it has been a two party screwing.

The voters of the R dont want most of hte legislation they pass either. It has always been like this. Its just that through credit they were able to keep the sheeple preoccupied.

The credit is running out, hence we are starting to ask some questions.

[-] 2 points by epa1nter (4650) from Rutherford, NJ 9 years ago

I think we're talking past each other. There has been a broad strategy, stating during Reagan, of the right, especially the Christian right, of building a national base founded on local politics from dog catcher to senator. They have worked on it quietly and relentlessly, and have succeeded in turning the entire country to the right. They have taken over the dialogue.It is no surprise that the Clinton was a. elected in the first place, b. that he, who was, up until then the most conservative DEm in the presidency since Truman would successfully be characterized as liberal, and c. would happily sign the repeal of Glass/Steagall. It is what the right's strategy created. They used the system itself to turn everybody rightward, and transform the Democratic party into moderate Reptilians. And yes, it has been a national screwing.

Well, the left, what's left of it, can use the same overall strategy. That strategy entails starting to field candidates on a local level, including school boards and zoning commissions. It means creating a network of local and state officials that forms a broad base for progressive change instead of consolidation of wealth and power.

The left has never done that. The right has, deliberately and consciously. And we have been left in the dust as a result.

[-] 1 points by hchc (3297) from Tampa, FL 9 years ago

You are forgetting that the right voters dont want most of this fascist takeover either. None of the voters do.

They dont want the patriot act. They dont want NDAA. They dont want Obamacare.

Your overall ideology is based on the D party EVER being about the people. It hasnt been. Anything they have ever done economically has helped big business.

This isnt a "right has one thing" its "the GovCorp" has one.

[-] 1 points by epa1nter (4650) from Rutherford, NJ 9 years ago

It doesn't matter that the electorate on the right is largely unhappy with the results of their strategy. They nevertheless engaged on that strategy, following their leadership.

And I would beg to differ about the right's support of NDAA. They DO support it, at least in far greater numbers than their counterparts on the left. The Patriot Act and NDAA is something lots of republitards defend vigorously as a necessary part of the war on terrorism (their characterization, not mine.)

Sorry, but the Dems HAVE been about the people. Your political memory is too short. LBJ was, despite his criminal stupidity about Vietnam. So was FDR. They were pro worker, pro union, pro living wage, pro- civil rights. So was Hubert Humphrey. And the left, erroneously believing he was pro-war, abandoned him, and we got Nixon instead.

(As to the Affordable Health Care act, ONLY the right opposes it. The Left wanted better, but realizes it is far better than nothing, which is what the right wanted.)

Now, I am NOT saying the legislatively there would be too great a difference between Obama and Romney. (Actually, I would say that strongly, but not in the context of this discussion.) I AM saying that they would appoint extremely different kinds of people to the Court. That is not nothing. In fact, that is EXPONENTIALLY more important than any single piece of legislation they might sign. It effects would last at LEAST an entire generation, since judges serve for LIFE, not for a 4 year term.

The difference in effect between legislation and Supreme Court rulings is like the difference between throwing a bullet and shooting a gun. Ignore that at your own (and everyone else's) peril.

[-] 1 points by hchc (3297) from Tampa, FL 9 years ago

Glad to see they've brainwashed you into thinking Obamacare is a good thing. He sold us all out on that one.

The fact that you have to dig through history to find some decent people (including one that led to hundreds of thousands of deaths in an unjust war- sound familiar?) is very telling.

You are so screwed by them, that you are clinging to their supreme court appointments. With all the power they weld, taht is what you are clinging to.

If they were about the people, you would be much more happy. As would I.

One of us is grasping for crumbs. The other wants real change.

[-] 1 points by epa1nter (4650) from Rutherford, NJ 9 years ago

Judging from your other posts, your kind change is one that most people would reject in a heartbeat.

Ignoring the Supreme Court's power is ostrich-like. Ignoring the issue does not make it go away. In fact it makes it worse.

Securing the court from becoming overwhelmingly right-wing is NOT at odds with acting for real change. No one is advocating that you go out and vote, then sit on your hands. It's simply that pushing for change without also securing the court will ensure that no change ever happens, because a hard right court would make SURE nothing changes. It is NOT an either/or proposition. Both must be accomplished. voting alone will do little, other than prevent disaster. Protesting without voting also accomplishes little.In order for either to be effective, BOTH must be done. Prevent disaster AND act for change.

[-] 1 points by hchc (3297) from Tampa, FL 9 years ago

Ok, so keep voting in corrupted assholes, in hopes that they dont vote for things like Citizens United. Be happy with a few liberal supreme court decisions, which play a minimal role in quality of life for 90% of people.

Keep playing their game. And screwing the rest of the country.

[-] 2 points by epa1nter (4650) from Rutherford, NJ 9 years ago

Ok, let's lay this out so even you can understand it.

Ginsburg will likely retire very soon. She has had pancreatic cancer and is old and tired. Breyer is no spring chicken, and he, too, will likely call it a day. Roberts, Scalia, Alito, and Thomas are all going strong.

Right now the court leans right wing by 5 to 4. That is bad. But it can change in the not too distant future.

If a Republitard wins the White House, Ginsburg and probably Breyer will be replaced by another right winger. That means, as a minimum. the right will have a 6 -3 majority. It will most likely be a 7 - 2 majority.

That cannot be changed in a lifetime.

Allowing that to happen, ESPECIALLY on the basis of progressive activism, is stupid beyond measure, and ethically and morally criminal.

[-] 1 points by hchc (3297) from Tampa, FL 9 years ago

4-5 keeps it interesting. You think these guys arent good at what they do?

Come on man, you really buy this shit?

[-] 2 points by epa1nter (4650) from Rutherford, NJ 9 years ago

Yeah, right, It's a conspiracy. The right wing and left wing get together to see how best to sell it.

You are a fool.

[-] 1 points by hchc (3297) from Tampa, FL 9 years ago

So what decisions do you think a left leaning court will overturn?

[-] 1 points by epa1nter (4650) from Rutherford, NJ 9 years ago

First, they will uphold, rather that destroy, Roe v Wade, which the right wing has been working to overturn. Citizens United would be quickly overturned. the WalMart class action suit regarding sex discrimination would be overturned. The Health Care bill would be upheld. Gay marriage rights would be affirmed. Affirmative Action would be reinstated. Firearm regulation would be reinstated. The NDAA and PAtriot Acts could be ruled unconstitutional. The list goes on.

Simply replacing Ginsburg and Breyer with two more people on the left will not change the current court's leaning. But allowing it be absolutely packed with hard right wingers will make any future changes virtually impossible through the lives of your grandchildren.

[-] 0 points by hchc (3297) from Tampa, FL 9 years ago

Health care is making 100's of millions off of abortions every year, its not getting over turned.

Citizens united isnt either, because they are all bought.

Everyone voting for NDAA but the supreme court will stand alone. Right.

Ofcourse HCR will be upheld, its a huge handout to the health care industry.

GAy marriage could go either way, not much money involved in it. But works as a great distraction.

You are freakin dillusional. Put down the partisan glasses and look at the MONEY $$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$

[-] 3 points by epa1nter (4650) from Rutherford, NJ 9 years ago

You, sir, are a moron. Look at the voting record, not your speculation. If things were as you describe all the 5-4 decisions would have been unanimous instead.

[-] -1 points by TrevorMnemonic (5827) 8 years ago

Wow what an old post. Who brought this up to the top?

Almost 16 years of war based on lies after the bush and obama legacies are done.


Corporate takeover.

[-] -1 points by OTP (-203) from Tampa, FL 8 years ago

Me. It was over a year ago, and Bensdad was giving his Dem dribble about money in politics.

Well here we are, TOURING THE FUCKING NATION, and guess what...There arent Dems signing on.

Perhaps after this past year of getting fucked left, right and sideways, he will wake up.

Or he'll dry himself off and come back for more.

PS- this isnt the "good" type of fucked we are talking about haha.