No Dog in This Fight

Discussion in 'Congress' started by BlackAsCoal, Oct 28, 2008.

  1. BlackAsCoal
    Offline

    BlackAsCoal Gold Member

    Joined:
    Oct 13, 2008
    Messages:
    5,203
    Thanks Received:
    528
    Trophy Points:
    155
    Ratings:
    +1,884
    Americans at-large agree with a great deal of the progressive agenda, so there's no need for politicians to constantly run to the right, including Barack Obama. "More than 80 percent of us oppose the war in Iraq, with the majority wanting immediate withdrawal (not ‘redeployment'). Larger majorities want an end to government wiretapping, a scaled-back military budget, and universal health care." It is McCain and Obama who are out of touch with the public. "Mr. Obama has based his candidacy no less on fear and militarism than the dreaded Republicans."

    No Dog in this Fight

    "We are given the ‘choice' between John ‘Bomb, bomb, bomb Iran' McCain and Barack ‘Threats in 100 different countries' Obama."

    This article previously appeared in Information Clearing House.

    For those of us who are antiwar, anti-government spying, anti-torture/rendition, and in favor of improving the lives of working people, this election season has been a nightmare. Most presidential elections are awful -- months/years of commercials, punditry, and lying -- but this year is particularly terrible.

    Contrary to the accepted "wisdom" of the electoral experts, Americans are not so divided as we might seem. More than 80 percent of us oppose the war in Iraq, with the majority wanting immediate withdrawal (not "redeployment"). Larger majorities want an end to government wiretapping (and vociferously opposed the wiretapping immunity bill), a scaled-back military budget, and universal health care that excludes the insurance industry. Further, almost no one outside the beltway or the NY financial district bought into the "crisis" that mandated a $850 billion bailout for Wall Street.

    These are not complicated positions, but we are given the "choice" between John "Bomb, bomb, bomb Iran" McCain and Barack "Threats in 100 different countries" Obama. McCain is beyond the pale for any but the proto-fascists among us, and even they have reservations about his health and sanity. But to question whether the potential ascension of "Saint Barack" is a good thing, to put into the play of questions of his militarism and support for authoritarianism at home, or to outright oppose his candidacy based on lies and war-mongering, is to invite the wrath of the "good liberal" majority.

    "Mr. Obama has based his candidacy no less on fear and militarism than the dreaded Republicans."

    Beginning with his 2004 convention speech when he called for "missile strikes" against Iran and Pakistan, through his 2008 convention speech imploring America to recognize the "threats of tomorrow," Mr. Obama has based his candidacy no less on fear and militarism than the dreaded Republicans. After explaining to a liberal friend that Mr. Obama called for an additional 92,000 troops for the military, for expansion of the genocide in Afghanistan into Pakistan, and an accelerated war on terror in 100 countries (up from Cheney's 60-country target list), she simply nodded and said, "This is what you have to say to get elected." Say what?

    I see. To appeal to the mass of the electorate, you have to take positions they oppose. This twisted "logic" would also seem to include supporting the Wall Street bailout and the wiretapping bill, in which Obama invested significant time and energy. In my naivete, I thought that any compromise geared toward "winning the election" by this logic meant taking populist positions that a candidate might otherwise not adopt. Yet here, Mr. Obama takes anti-populist positions to...win the election?

    A candidate for office can only be judged on what he/she says he believes and says he will do, and on his/her track record. We have nothing else. In the case of Obama, we are supposed to believe he says and acts on motives other than his core beliefs for unstated other reasons. This is, I respectfully submit, nonsense.

    "Obama's vision is of an imperial America on the march, waging war in pursuit of unspecified ‘threats' with a bigger, better managed military."

    When he voted for the wiretap bill, he said he wanted to have all "necessary tools" at his disposal for an Obama presidency. When he calls for more "boots on the ground" in Afghanistan, or for "missile strikes" in Pakistan, or "keeping the nuclear option on the table" in Iran, he means what he is saying. His vision is of an imperial America on the march, waging war in pursuit of unspecified "threats" with a bigger, better managed military. That vision includes domestic spying and austerity budgets for the foreseeable future.

    So where does this leave that part of America that opposes wars of aggression, torture, extraordinary rendition, and the war on terror? Where does it leave people who want to resist domestic wiretapping or oppose sacrificing our futures for Wall Street profits? I know the drill: hold your nose and vote Democratic...again.

    No, not this time, and never again. The majority of us do not have a dog in this billion-dollar electoral fight, and the majority will not vote at all, and why should they? If McCain wins, more war and more austerity. If Obama wins, even more war and even more austerity, but with no political opposition. By November 5, the same people will be controlling our lives, regardless of the election outcome. Real power never gets voted out of office. It must be confronted and overturned.

    blackagendareport.com - No Dog in this Fight
     
  2. GigiBowman
    Offline

    GigiBowman Active Member

    Joined:
    Oct 21, 2008
    Messages:
    947
    Thanks Received:
    157
    Trophy Points:
    28
    Ratings:
    +157
    [​IMG]
     
  3. DiamondDave
    Offline

    DiamondDave Army Vet

    Joined:
    Jun 30, 2008
    Messages:
    18,169
    Thanks Received:
    2,812
    Trophy Points:
    183
    Location:
    MD, on the Potomac River
    Ratings:
    +2,816
    blackagendareport

    :rolleyes:

    Funny... what would anyone be called who used a reference of whiteagendareport?
     
  4. del
    Offline

    del BANNED

    Joined:
    Sep 3, 2008
    Messages:
    45,052
    Thanks Received:
    9,830
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Ratings:
    +9,885
    uh, white?
     
  5. BlackAsCoal
    Offline

    BlackAsCoal Gold Member

    Joined:
    Oct 13, 2008
    Messages:
    5,203
    Thanks Received:
    528
    Trophy Points:
    155
    Ratings:
    +1,884
    They'd be called somebody who reads the Wall Street Journal.
     
  6. DiamondDave
    Offline

    DiamondDave Army Vet

    Joined:
    Jun 30, 2008
    Messages:
    18,169
    Thanks Received:
    2,812
    Trophy Points:
    183
    Location:
    MD, on the Potomac River
    Ratings:
    +2,816
    Funny.. did not know that had a "white" agenda... or at least no perception of that other than a racist..... it is a financial publication, not a white one, black one, red one, yellow one, purple one, or whatever

    but nice try
     
  7. BlackAsCoal
    Offline

    BlackAsCoal Gold Member

    Joined:
    Oct 13, 2008
    Messages:
    5,203
    Thanks Received:
    528
    Trophy Points:
    155
    Ratings:
    +1,884
    There are a lot of things you don't know. .. and I don't blame you for what you don't know.

    If you'd like to discuss why there is need for demogrpahic specific media I'll be more than happy to do so .. start with Marketing 101 .. then ask yourself why are there publications specifically for men .. and women .. and children .. and hispanic people .. and jewish people .. people who cook .. and people who fish ...

    Need we take this any further or can we discuss the actual content of the article?
     
  8. editec
    Offline

    editec Mr. Forgot-it-All

    Joined:
    Jun 5, 2008
    Messages:
    41,427
    Thanks Received:
    5,598
    Trophy Points:
    48
    Location:
    Maine
    Ratings:
    +5,617
    If this author is expecting the people not to vote for Obama based on the fact that he is probably a warmongering puppet of the military industrial complex, he's out of luck.

    Right now the ONLY issue is: Will Obama do ANYTHING to help out the American people?

    The American people aren't, I suspect, expecting much

    But they are HOPING for some relief so that they can live in their homes, and heat them, and put food on the table, and maybe even be able to afford health care and education for their kids.

    Americans are not voting for Obama, they are voting AGAINST what they percieve is a more of same POTUS in the form of McCain.

    Americans don't really give a damn how many Islamic people die, right now.

    The wolf is at their doors and that is foremost on their minds.
     
    Last edited: Oct 28, 2008
  9. BlackAsCoal
    Offline

    BlackAsCoal Gold Member

    Joined:
    Oct 13, 2008
    Messages:
    5,203
    Thanks Received:
    528
    Trophy Points:
    155
    Ratings:
    +1,884
    I don't think the author expects people to do anything. He's voicing the opposition .. which does exist .. to both corporate pro-war candidates.

    Your comments, some of which I agree with, are telling.

    Americans don't care how many Islamic people die is the truth .. but tells of how deserving we are of our fate and the crisis we are in and headed for. We don't seem to have the wisdom to understand how they are connected.

    The wolf is at the door is also true, but the wolf is dressed up as Little Red Robinghood and we don't seem to have the wisdom to see him .. even though his teeth (bailout) are showing.

    Perhaps the author is just expressing the same frustration that a great many Americans have in recognizing that collectively, Americans simply don't have the wisdom to see how easily they're played.
     
  10. bigdaddygtr
    Offline

    bigdaddygtr Senior Member

    Joined:
    Aug 28, 2008
    Messages:
    1,139
    Thanks Received:
    72
    Trophy Points:
    48
    Ratings:
    +72

    Were you just born a jackass or did you come into this on your own? Always trying to incite the other side(white) when racial topics come up. A sign of your ignorance and complete lack of education

    As far as the article, I completely disagree with their assessment of Obama
     

Share This Page