The truth is that every morning war is declared afresh. And the men who wish to continue it are as guilty as the men who began it, more guilty perhaps, for the latter perhaps did not foresee all its horrors. -Marcel Proust, novelist (1871-1922)
Last October I took major shit from OS luminaries for predicting Obama would be more of the same.
Turns out I was right.
Many of those OSers who criticized have changed their tune and come down off their hopium highes. Many have not.
It seems the new meme is to attack those who are critical of Obama's many failures to act and his many failures to do the right thing with charges of racism.
Criticizing Obama does not mean you're a racist
I even recently received an email stating that those criticizing Obama are racist whackjobs who are faulting Obama for being "President While Black" (PWB).
It asked, "Exactly what IS your problem with the properly elected president in office right now?"
Oh, bull fucking shit.
Here is my reply to that email and to those who try to suppress valid criticisms of Obama:
I do not follow the website you refer to and am not sure why you put me on your distro list for this email, but purely based on what you wrote in the email - You need to check yourself.
Obama is a war criminal just like most US Presidents for the past 200 odd years.
As just one small instance proving his criminal nature, Obama is responsible for the predator drones that have killed hundreds of innocent people with missile launches along the Af/Pak border since he was sworn in on Jan 20.
Are those people not human beings? Do their murders not count?
Denying the illegality of their deaths is what is racist.
Murdering hundreds of innocent people in direct violation of International Treaties and the rules of war cannot be overlooked. Obama is guilty.
Obama is a mass murderer like the Bushes, Clinton, Reagan, Nixon, LBJ, Kennedy, etc before him.
Far from backing away from the war in Afghanistan, Obama has increased our presence there and upped the casualties considerably. He currently plans to send even more troops into harms way which will inevitably result in more deaths for all sides.
Are you only anti-war when it is a war being promoted by a Republican?
Despite his party having overwhelming majorities in both houses of Congress, Obama has not ended the wars, has not repealed the Patriot Act, has not repealed FISA, has not stopped rendition or torture, has not closed GITMO, has not closed Bagram, has not closed the third country black program prisons, and I COULD GO ON AND ON AND ON.
Call me RACIST, I dare you. Call me a HATER, I double dare you.
Better yet, wake up and realize the Democratic party is little better than the Republican. They are both owned by the same corporate interests and serve the same wealthy war profiteers. Dennis Kucinich and Russ Fiengold are the minority and the fringe and rare.
Yes, some "conservatives" may dislike Obama because he has mixed heritage, but progressives who have a clue about the world know he is just another scum bag politician who makes promises with no intention of keeping them.
Knowing better and refusing to pick the lesser of two evils, I did not vote for Obama.
I cast my ballot for Nader - a true hero.
Sure Obama is better than McCain would have been - along the lines that being kicked in the gut is always better than being kicked in the balls.
Wake up!
PS - Don't even get me started on so called healthcare reform. Since when is a public option radical? Public option is legalized rape by the insurance companies of millions of more Americans which will only serve to enrich the greedy corporations that are causing this crisis to begin with. What happened to single payer? HR676 (medicare for all) has 93 sponsors signed on in the house. It should become the law of the land and no half assed bullshit compromises should be accepted.
" The world is a dangerous place to live, not because of the people who are evil, but because of the people who won't do anything about it."
~ Albert Einstein ~
And lastly as you contemplate your electoral options in 2012, chew on this letter to the editor published by the Seattle Times:
Democratic Party fails to keep politicians accountable
The Democratic Party is dead. It might be walking, but it is effectively dead. It is time for a third party. Sure the Democrats have had ups and downs but the long, slow slide started when we failed to prosecute Richard Nixon for obvious crimes.
We let the oil companies steal from us during the gas shortages. We failed to stand up to the "government is the problem" propaganda of Ronald Reagan. We failed to reinstate the Fairness Doctrine. We didn't prosecute George H.W. Bush and his cronies for crimes committed in Central America. We said nothing when Bill Clinton signed the Telecommunications Act of 1997, which allowed unparalleled consolidation in news media and the spread of anti-public propaganda worthy of Tokyo Rose or Joseph Goebbels.
We allowed the Supreme Court to appoint George W. Bush to a position he was clearly unsuited for and then re-elected him again four years later. We let Bush take away civil rights, violate the Constitution and lie us into two illegal wars.
We allowed the appointment of Supreme Court justices that only serve the mega-corporations and their leaders. And now we are allowing the right wing to kill true health-care reform, change that could transform the lives of millions of Americans for the better, free citizens from dead-end jobs just to maintain health insurance and create a new business climate that would add jobs for millions.
For decades the Democratic Party has failed to stand strong in the face of propaganda, lies and those who have stolen our prosperity. It is time to start a true progressive party, wooing actual liberals from the Democratic Party and wooing true patriots from the Republican Party.
We must start now, with the next election, and never fail to stand up to the bullies who are screaming in our faces as they reach into our pockets.
-- John S. Snow, Woodinville
The cost of "exporting democracy" is real blood on our hands. Look at what your blind support of Obama is costing:
Imagine those are your kids lying there dead. What is the solution to Af/Pak? Nicholas Kristof nailed it. Education and agricultural development, not more troops and bombs and dead children.
Edit on October 3, 2009:
To those fools in the comments below saying give Obama more time or excusing his piss poor performance because he is merely the president and the dems of the House and Senate do not have his back, explain away these things that have been ALL WITHIN OBAMA's CONTROL:
Obama supports extending Patriot Act provisions
and
Obama extends blockade on Cuba for another year
and
Bagram: The sham of closing
and
Obama Fires Diplomat for Urging Fraud Probe in Afghan Vote
and
Obama Hires a general who Tortured Men to death in Iraq and covered up the Tillman Murder to Run Afghanistan
and
The Obama Justice Department has very little interest in ustice for the detainees at Gitmo, but an obsession with guarding the dark secrets of their predecessors.
and
Obama quietly deploying 13,000 more US troops to Afghanistan (Oct 13, 2009)
Move is separate from Nato commander General Stanley McChrystal's request to increase troop levels
Get real.
Obama could stop killing little kids in Afghanistan with Predator drones in an instant just by ordering it or is he suddenly not the Commander in Chief of the military?
If he has the time to proactively work to keep the Patriot Act intact and continue a policy of indefinite preventive detention in violation of all consitutional principles, he has had the time to have closed Gitmo, etc.
Stop excusing his fuck ups and misdeeds and hold the war criminal you voted for to account.
If I am naive, you are all GOOD GERMANS and should be ashamed.
Those who write the deaths in Af/Pak are the cost of the reality of politics are scum sucking assholes who are complicit in murder and war crimes.
Update on October 4, 2009:
Even Saturday Night Live gets it.
What has Obama done for the US?
"I'm seeing two big accomplishments: Jack and Squat."
Update October 13, 2009:
Seems you people need to learn a little something about Ralph Nader.
Your ignorance is appalling, but not unexpected.
Especially those who wrote in their comments that I had voted for a Green. Nader ran as an Independent in 2008. That just shows how stupid some of you people are. You don't even know who the third party candidates and independents were. Too willing to suck the dick of the corporate duo-party and midlessly chant hope and change while children are murdered for profit.
In 2008, Nader was the best of a bunch of bad by a mile, but no means ideal. There are many other I would have voted before him, but none of them were running.
Obama was obviously a more of the same corporate owned hack. McCain was Obama only older and not as slick. There are only cosmetic differences between the two to keep each party's faithful convinced the Democratic and Republicans parties are not the corporate owned duo-party that they really are. Things like abortion, etc. The Democratic wing of the duo-party pretends to be pro-choice while the Republican wing pretends to be pro-life. The better to fleece the sheep while the beat goes on.
If you think I threw my vote away while congratulating yourself for voting for War Criminal Obama, you are a stupid fool.
By any standard, your vote was just as "wasted" if not more since it hasn't produced jack or squat to quote SNL. Just more corporate hegemony and murder.
Nader on the other hand has saved hundreds of thousands of lives due to his automobile safety activism, not to mention his work to force the FDA to do their job.
Merely visiting the Wikipedia entry would aid you tremendously.
"When asked about claims of being a spoiler, Nader typically points to the controversial Supreme Court ruling that halted a Florida recount, Gore's loss in his home state of Tennessee, and the "quarter million Democrats who voted for Bush in Florida." " - Wiki
Did you notice the link above about Obama quietly sending 13,000 more soldiers to Afghanistan? Real man of peace that president Obama is.
Update October 25, 2009
Obama Is Keeping Bush's Worst "War on Terror" Policies Firmly In Place
Thanks to behind-the-scenes maneuvering by the Obama administration, a bipartisan majority has approved legislation that seems to abandon hope of reining in the Patriot Act.
Update October 30, 2009
"In a ceremony Wednesday, US President Barack Obama signed legislation authorizing the largest ever military budget, a gargantuan $680 billion for the Pentagon, including $130 billion for the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan. On Thursday, he signed a spending bill funneling another $44 billion into the Department of Homeland Security, to strengthen the apparatus of state repression within the United States."
"Each of the bills contained provisions aimed at further restricting democratic rights. The Pentagon budget bill authorizes the use of military tribunals to try prisoners at Guantanamo Bay and others seized illegally, either overseas or within the US, as part of the “war on terror.” It also bars the release of Guantanamo prisoners—even those found completely innocent—into the United States. It prohibits bringing Guantanamo prisoners to trial on US soil without a 45-day advance notice to Congress."
"The Department of Homeland Security appropriations bill effectively prohibits the release of photographs taken by US military personnel during torture sessions at US bases in Iraq, Afghanistan and Guantanamo Bay. It exempts these photos from the provisions of the Freedom of Information Act, under which the American Civil Liberties Union and several media outlets have filed suit in federal court. The exemption would apply, not just to the photos sought by the ACLU, but to any photos taken between September 11, 2001 and January 22, 2009 to which the Pentagon has objections."
"Obama signed the record Pentagon budget less than three weeks after receiving the Nobel Peace Prize. He then traveled to Dover Air Force Base in Delaware to be photographed late Wednesday night standing at attention as the coffins of 18 US military personnel killed in Afghanistan in the last few days arrived in the United States."
Yes, that Obama is so wonderful. Look how he covers up the crimes of the past administrations and perpetuates unconstitutional acts. What hope! What change!
Update October 31, 2009:
and
and
Update November 1, 2009:
and
and
Obama's latest use of "secrecy" to shield presidential lawbreaking
How Obama Sold Women Out
and
Pharma Deal With White House On Course To Net Industry Billions
Update November 14, 2009:
and
and
and
and
Update November 15, 2009:
and
and
While eliminating the Taliban leader Baitullah Mehsud, the United States launched at least 15 missile strikes and killed, besides Mr. Mehsud, somewhere between 200 and 300 people. Was that toll "disproportionate" to the threat posed by a single terrorist and therefore a war crime? (I don't agree with the conclusion made about the Goldstone Report, but the point about killing 200 to 300 people to eliminate one person is obscene.)
and
and
Update November 17, 2009:
and
and
and
and
and
Update November 22, 2009:
and
TIP:
Enter the amount, and click "Tip" to submit!
Peter Winkler
Dr. Evan Levine
Sean Fenley
Ted Kappes
Lina Thorne
Glenn Gilchrist
Salon.com
Comments
Pretty much sums up the choices we have in every election. Great post.
One need NOT be white to be GUILTY of racism and ANYONE who believes that only whites are capable of racism has a distinct lack of critical thinking skills. If expressing negative opinions of someone based ENTIRELY on the color of their skin is "racism" when the person expressing the opinions in question is white it is ALSO racism when the person expressing negative opinions based ONLY on skin color is black. Racism IS. Racism is NOT limited to those who are white. THAT is the fallacy that people who lack critical thinking skills have fallen for.
http://i39.photobucket.com/albums/e192/combatkelly/Slide%20Show/WTC_attack_9-11.jpg
I say stand up and say nope, no way am I taking this lying down or on my knees, where most folks are right now.
I say shit is shit, black, brown, or white.
I don't mean to rant here, I am now hot under the collar.
Rated highly!!!!!!!!!!!
No, here's why we're in Afghanistan and will continue to be until the pipeline is secure. Notice the date of the presentation on the first one: two years before 9/11......
Statement by John J. Maresca, Vice President, Unocal Corporation To House Committee On International Relations Subcommittee On Asia And The Pacific, 2/12/98
http://www.ratical.org/ratville/CAH/linkscopy/Maresca2USG.html
Chemtrail Central :: View topic - The Afgan oil/gas pipeline and Henry Kissinger
http://www.chemtrailcentral.com/forum/thread6546.html
Afghanistan, Turkmenistan Oil and Gas, and the Projected Pipeline
I got yelled at once for saying of President Obama "same ol' bullshit, nice suit".
Turns out I was right."
"Let's not start sucking each others dicks quite yet gentlemen."
-Winston Wolf - "Pulp Fiction"
It's been 8 months. Bush was on vacation his first 8 months.
But if there are any loyal Dems reading this I would like to remind you of the 2006 election. The Republicans thought they had that one in their back pocket too, but they lost 32 seats in the House and 6 in the Senate. (The Democrats would've gained 7 seats - and the majority -except they backed Lieberman, so it was a 50-50 tie.)
How quickly political fortunes change. How ever will the Dems keep their majorities when they have alienated them with the midnight "resignation" of Van Jones and the upcoming sellout of the public option.
It's time these centrists find out the limits of their power.
I'll stick with the president who is at least TRYING to tackle a problem Big Insurance doesn't want him to touch because his doing so threatens their obscene profit margins, and fighting people who have a vested interest in seeing his presidency fail and aren't shy about saying so. I'll stick with the president who's trying to make it illegal to cancel someone's insurance policy just when they need it most.
I like a president who can speak articulately and use correct English.
I like a president who allowed Iran, a sovereign state, to work out their OWN electoral troubles without rushing in and doing something stupid and irreparable. Care to guess how McCain would have responded to that?
I'll stick with the president who wants stem cell research to thrive instead of stifling it on the basis of his own religious narrowness.
I never voted for Obama because I thought he was perfect or because I thought he'd usher in a sort of left wing paradise. I voted for him because I believed he was the best candidate in the race, and because I agreed with him more of the time than I disagreed with him, and because the McCain/Palin ticket was intolerable.
If that means my standards are too low for your delicate sensibilities.... TOUGH.
As for the matter of the alternative, if you look at all of the really good things that we have in this country, all of them have come about as a result either directly or indirectly because of mass movements. As long as the right wing set the terms of public policy debates in this country (look at the GWOT, look at health care, look at whatever issue you want), it doesn't matter who is in office and what their party affiliation, they could all be socialists, the problems we have now will continue. The only way to set things on a different path is to build a movement of the people that isn't tied into electoral politics and electoral parties. It must create a different political atmosphere and not put its eggs in the basket of electoral politics. Consider how much power the GOP now exerts even though they have been taking major defeats in elections in recent cycles. They understand that setting the terms of debate nationally is where power lies.
Obama has disappointed at times, but not even close to make me want to give up on him. Afghanistan is a travesty to say the least. It is wrong, wrong, wrong. I have written several posts about how wrong Obama is on this one. As one of the commenters noted, there’s oil involved here. US foreign policy is always about protecting our financial interests.
I agree that the Dems are just the same as the Repugs. I totally support a third party. The time is actually past due. There is absolutely no effective leadership in the Congress, and that worries me. It is totally about big business and special interests. There is no agenda to improve the lives of Americans, and people around the world, unless some corporation can make a nice profit off it.
Way to put yourself out there!
I do believe that citizens can have impact on domestic issues and did get involved in health care reform. I am a yellow dog democrat but yes a disillusioned one.
If the Obama administration caves on all the major points of health care reform well then I will be depressed and disillusioned, as I was today when I read the articles that in fact they are starting to cave! I will keep writing and calling legislators but today was a very depressing and sad day b/c I realized we arent getting real reform.
Third party is absolutely something to consider. I would support Ventura or even Howard Dean or just an actual liberal that does not concede everything to the right.
"because his doing so threatens their obscene profit margins,"
Would you care to explain how much an obscene profit margins is? This is where you liberals come off the track and become a train wreck. You can't do it. It just makes you feel good to complain about somebody who you think is doing well.
"Monkey Fingered"
As you are in “I told you so” mode, I am tempted to repost the article I did before the presidential election in which I recounted the disillusionment in the UK with Blair and Brown.
I recall the day in 1997 when Blair became PM of the UK. You had eight years of Bush. Oh, the euphoria – dancing in the streets! We had eighteen years of the Thatcher and Major in which the country’s economy was broken up and sold to foreign capitalists.
It was quite a shock to us to see that Blair carried on and extended Thatcher’s policies and got the UK involved in Iraq and Afghanistan.
It goes to prove that it is not healthy to delude oneself and live in fantasy land. The slaves in the south coped with captivity, toil and physical abuse by comforting themselves that there would be a better life in heaven. People today comfort themselves when they suffer from dictators by projecting their desires onto a messiah who is going to make it all better.
It is difficult to achieve change through politicians. It is best not to build humans up into heroes.
I can’t believe that people are excusing Obama on the grounds that he is articulate and attractive. Didn’t Americans learn anything through the JFK experience? It’s all smoke and mirrors.
Kaplan admits that tiny, cash-strapped Sri Lanka, generally thought of as “third world” or “developing”, has succeeded where the mighty USA has failed. The man who has dominated Sri Lankan life for the worse for thirty years, Vellupillai Prabakharan, leader of the Tamil Tigers, is dead, while Osama Bin Laden is still living, a free man.
Kaplan asks if the US can learn from Sri Lanka’s success but answers:
“These are methods the U.S. should never use.”
The Sri Lankan government defeated, within its own sovereign borders, with the support of its electorate, what Kaplan admits to be a terrorist group “among the best organized and most ruthless to have emerged anywhere since the Second World War”. The US has for long used and continues to use even more brutal methods than those condemned by Kaplan.
President Obama said: “If the Afghan government falls to the Taliban – or allows al-Qaida to go unchallenged – that country will again be a base for terrorists who want to kill as many of our people as they possibly can (my emphasis). . . For the Afghan people, a return to Taliban rule would condemn their country to brutal governance, international isolation, a paralysed economy, and the denial of basic human rights to the Afghan people – especially women and girls. The return in force of al-Qaida terrorists who would accompany the core Taliban leadership would cast Afghanistan under the shadow of perpetual violence.”
Killing Afghans, Pakistanis, Iraqis doesn’t matter.
Sri Lanka had an even greater interest in avoiding falling to the Tigers. As Kaplan points out 3,000 died on 9/11 – perhaps as many as 100,000 Sri Lankans have died because of the Tigers.
Sri Lanka’s President Rajapaksa responded to criticism from the US of his methods by pointing out that his government had not sent bombers and drones thousands of miles to attack other nations. “Genocide is the systematic elimination of one community by another. No community has been systematically destroyed in my country and no Sri Lankan Government would stand such brutality. If my government wanted to destroy any one community, why should we have rescued more than 300,000 civilians from the war zone and from the LTTE guns? People who commit genocide don’t save the people they are supposed to be destroying.”
Will he have to graduate from having killed thousands in Af/Pak to hundreds of thousands like Bush in Iraq? Mass murder is mass murder.
Will it be evaluating the complete lack of progress when he runs for re-election in 2012? Or will you then justify voting for him again because he is the lesser of two evils or needs yet more time to bring about "Hope" and "Change?"
Put yourselves out there at little and let us know what it will take. Set a progress point. Hold him to something. Don't be an unthinking cop out who merely calls for more time. It could be as simple as rendition ended by 2010, but set a deadline for something.
For those who think third parties are not viable or are a "wasted" vote, you are buying into the BS the corporate owned Dems/Reps want you to believe. If not you and your vote, then who? Stop being a sheep and send a third party ten bucks today. There are plenty to pick from. Wikipedia lists over a dozen. Apathy is not the answer.
Ralph Nader is a true American hero. He has saved hundreds of thousands of American lives, unlike the war mongers we elect to the presidency. Cynthia McKinney with her trip to Gaza and illegal capture at sea by the Israeli Navy last month is starting to impress. She did not sign their bogus confession and made them back down and release her from their prison. Point being, there are third party candidates worth voting for and supporting. The lesser of two evils must be rejected.
Black mentioned the third parties being banned from presidential debates which is true. It did happen. Not only did that happen, but the Democratic Party banned Kucinich and Gravel from primary debates even though they met the previously announced qualifications to be on the stage. Can't have the sheep hearing truth, now can we?
For those who say they agree with much or most of this post or that some is true, but some not true, you need to be more specific. I cannot read your mind to respond. Tell me what I am wrong about or what you do not agree with. Back up your position.
To those who continue to insist opposition to Obama is racist, to reiterate, yes, there is a racist component to the right wing opposition, but what the media and the administration are not admitting is that many on the left are equally unhappy, but for valid (not racist) reasons.
Obama is at best Bush-lite and in many ways worse than Bush because lots of progressives are willing to bend over and take things from Obama, like an increase in troop presence in Af/Pak, that they would have howled to high heaven about if Bush had tried to get away with it.
We are taught from a young age that this is America the beautiful that can do no wrong and all our evil past acts are deliberately buried. Very few escape that indoctrination and wake up to the true nature of the Empire.
How many innocent children must Obama blow to bloody pieces before you realize he is more of the same?
It not only tastes like cowardly chicken, it tastes of ashes, blood, filthy lucre and the devil's excrement, oil.
Padraig Colman as always shines the light of historical reason on any argument and points out the hypocrisy of our Empire.
Just this -- forcing millions of uninsured people to hand over thousands of dollars APIECE to the health insurance companies for their worthless services. Anybody doubt that their profit margins will be greater after his "health care reform" is passed?"
His "strategy" seems to consist of conceding defeat before he even begins the battle.
Obama is a fraud.
I, too, voted for Nader, and for the same reasons.
Rated.
I hope that Americans can push him to do something for the health care system. I hope that Americans can push him to stop the war in Afghanistan and Pakistan.
I never believed in the official story about Osama Bin Laden etc behind 9/11. Osama might have been even dead at that time. I think that only Americans themselves could have arranged 9/11.
Maybe it was done by Bush. But I've never seriously believed in that theory. I think that it as done by somebody else, but Bush took the advantage of it.
My hope now is simply this - WHILE you're busy killing off inconvenient populations in other countries, can we please get health care reform passed? Can you at least do something for this country, still, now that you've basically proven that you're not really any different than any other member of the executive branch we've had? I mean, at least FDR ushered in the New Deal.
If Obama even gives us a piece of a New Deal, I'll be happy, because I think the killing is going to continue no matter what. I'd direct you to read Ishmael, by Daniel Quinn. It's not Obama's fault he's a killer, he pretty much has to be unless everything around us radically changes.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ishmael_(novel)
We're takers. And in order for us to keep taking on a planet with limited resources and this many people, some have to die.
I think we should cut the crap and get to it. ("It" being universal health care, an end to every war and a complete overhaul of the educational system - which I believe are the roots of our economic troubles.)
I still have hope because the discussion has begun. But, the hope and change that might come to pass are constantly soured by the mean-spirited glee that people take from pissing in the punchbowl instead of contributing tangible solutions. (Case in point: Bringing a rifle to a health care forum.)
I have always been strongly opposed to the wars we are in now, but somehow I doubt that there would be any fewer dead children if McCain had won. Third parties need to stop blaming the system and start blaming the fact that they tend to pander to single interests and turn off voters by nominating goofballs.
The question remains... what are we going to do about it? For me, this means writing about where the money comes from for these little health care rally shenanigans, opposing the war at every turn and participating in my local government.
(thumbified. kumbaya.)
I voted for Nader in '04, in hopes of establishing a third party, a hope I no longer hold. But since you mention it, and seem to hold some hope of your own out for Ralph Nader & Cynthia McKinney, allow me to comment on my personal experience of them.
Nader visited the white-bread, liberal college town of New Paltz NY on two occasions in the past two years. On the first, he personally came by to endorse the candidacy of Jason West, the Green Party mayor who made headlines by publicly "marrying" two dozen gay couples back in '04. West was running for re-election. West lost his bid for a second term to a political nobody. Nader's endorsement probably cost him votes.
The second time was shortly before the '08 election. Nader drew a crowd of about 40 people. He acted cranky and spent his time blaming the system for his latest failure as a candidate. He denounced the Green Party along with the others. He acted and sounded like a bitter old man. Everyone else was to blame.
As for McKinney, I've included, at the risk of over-staying my welcome, a straight news story I wrote about her appearance at an MLK memorial conference in '08. I'll leave it to your judgment whether you can detect a person of presidential character in her remarks:
"NEW PALTZ — He's been called everything from a Communist to a saint to a martyr. But it's safe to say Martin Luther King has rarely been called a Red Pill Leader, as he was last night by the controversial and unpredictable former Democratic congresswoman from Georgia Cynthia McKinney.
McKinney, who is the Green Party's candidate for president, was the keynote speaker at a convocation of black and Latino organizations that drew approximately 200 students and adults to the SUNY campus for the annual celebration of King's birthday.
McKinney's description of King referred to the film "The Matrix," in which the hero, Neo, swallows a red pill that allows him to escape the illusory world that gave the film its title.
Most Americans, in King's day as well as our own, McKinney said, have chosen to swallow the equivalent of the film's blue pill, the one that keeps them safe in a cocoon of official lies, distortions and disinformation propagated by the government, corporate America and especially the corporate news media.
Since his death, McKinney said, King's memory has been soft-pedaled and made palatable by these same forces. Lost in the ensuing years is the fact that King was harassed and spied upon by the CIA, vilified in the mainstream media and finally, McKinney said, murdered by a conspiracy hatched in "the bowels of the Pentagon," in cooperation with U.S. military intelligence agencies and the mob.
McKinney urged her audience to "rise up in the spirit of Dr. King" by invoking a conversation between a pair of other characters from a sci-fi classic, TV's "Star Trek." She said the Vulcan Spock warned ship's physician "Bones" McCoy that "Evil seeks to maintain power by suppressing the truth," to which the testy Bones responded by reminding Spock that evil also intentionally misleads the innocent."
I didn't mention in the story that the students who were there were mystified by her presentation and spent most of their time texting and playing games on their electronica.
The Matrix. Star Trek. Cynthia McKinney. My God.
I, like Grif, believe in the right to criticize our president, no matter what the color their skin. I don't believe every one who is doing this is a racist, I am being critical of him, although much more critical of the Democratic party, and I am not a racist. I think the far right, with their visceral reaction without any seemingly justifiable reason for their "concerns" are teetering on a nerve of racism, whether conscious or not. They simply can not accept anything but the status quo. That's my $.02.
I won't give up on Obama - he is doing more than I have seen in a long time from the white house to turn the tides. I do think he has been inconsistent, sophmoorish, and otherwise irritating at times.
I am not sure the answer between single payer and public option - thank you for making me revisit this. I am still trying to flush this out and would like to see more constructive dialogue around this.
Blaming Obama, this early on, for the deaths in Paki/Afg for wars he inherited I do believe is far reaching. He has inherrited a HUGE cluter-f**k and it is going to take time to unravel it. Anyone in that position needs support in doing so, not judgment. I do feel strongly about this - we are a nation of ADD and I think we need to come together as best as possible versus dividing more.
Please consider this...you obviously have a strong, leading voice. I think there are a few broad strokes being made here, potentially, and with a few breaths you may see there is some grey.
Passion appreciated, writing is great!
"Disagreement is racist" is the kind of silly non-argument I don't let my freshmen get away with in formal writing, and it depresses me to hear so much of it from otherwise thoughtful folks in what's supposed to be the public sphere.
a. Ron Paul
b. Dennis Kucinich,or
c. amended the constitution to vote for shrub again.
rated
And, thank you for the photos of the beautiful children, there are too few published so Americans can see what they have allowed while they 'go shopping.' Your tag, 'wake up people' is right on.
I am with you, brother!
Rated and not just for the Megan Fox and pit bull photos!! :)
The question is: How can we get our power back? It will require legislation - addressing campaign financing, among other things; legal rulings - addressing civil rights violations - the legality of invading our privacy, for one; and executive cojones, which seem to be in short supply.
And WTC, 9/11 -- those terrorists were from Saudi Arabia, United Arab Emirates, Lebanon or Egypt. Not from the hard rock mountains of Afghanistan.
Almost all meddling colonizations and spreading of religion and political system has resulted in the decimation of the original people of the world. Even if one were to choose a time frame that one wishes to start their history books from the world has to at some point agree that it is better to negotiate with the brain than with machines and guns. Even though there are lesser wars than the past the advent of mass killing weapons outweighs that goodness.
The only changes that any party can push through effectively (other than war decisions) seems to be the ones from the "other" party. According to me Health Care Reform is a Rep issue so I am still hoping .....
See we have stories about the Afghans which no one seems to have read here. They choose to die before giving up. There MUST be something to the people who have never been conquered not even by Alexander...something that the West cannot fathom. Carpet bombing has already razed their land to the ground and yet they rise and fight in their mountains which we can never know and we can never get used to. What a situation! When one country attacked another because there was one man hiding there or had taken refuge there. What does one man matter when he represents an ideology? The ideology is spreading and has spread and instead of grappling with issues that might soften the radical ideology we attacked a land that is already laid low.
The hawks around are always circling......they are bound by their nature....what a dilemma!
Those are extreme images, but that's the reality Obama supporters need to come to terms with. While the silly debates over the significance of Obama's race continue to distract us, his hands are covered in blood just as Bush's were.
There can be no excuse for what is being done to those people in the name of "freedom and democracy".
If we want to see a change in America, maybe people should campaign to lower the voting age to 10. Most children these days seem to have not only a better grasp of how the world should be, but are about as literate and knowledgeable as the average American adult, anyway.
NEVER quit -- NEVER give up
already rated
But who can we vote for? I am afraid we will end up with mob rule. Nadar and Kucinich are good, but seem to get no support.
We are asked to support any health reform but I think everyone should denounce congress and the president in every way until they shape up.
The Atlantic magazine jan/feb 2009 has some good relevant articles especially one about Schumer.
Don't you think Obama should be given the same consideration?
Where were you when it was obvious that the lies about WMD in Iraq weren't even paper-thin secure?
Damn. I started seeing this crap one month after Obama was sworn into office. Like how the bailout of automakers was supposedly his baby, or the bailout of the banks (with no strings attached) was his baby.
Granted, one does, in the Office of the President, assume ownership of a certain amount of inertia, but really, the POTUS is one of 3 Constitutionally equal branches of government.
Obstructionism by the legislative branch does not equal the POTUS failing, or equal the POTUS causing death. That's a continuation of policies that began under BUSH. And it will take some time to rectify them.
Closing Guantanamo by 2010? Not gonna happen.
No new taxes? Not gonna happen.
Responsibility among the financial titans who blew everything up for normal people? Not gonna happen.
Ask your congessman where he or she gets campaign funding. There you will find the reasons for failure.
Not in the current POTUS. He threatens too much entrenched corruption.
Until such time as the USA changes (or is forced to change) its world priorities, we are only talking one inch of difference for any President. I would contend, however, that that one inch is important. That is why I like Obama and not Bush.
Nah. I actually agree with most of WHAT you said in your post.
P.S. Hope you don't mind if I call you an ASSHOLE for HOW you said it, though, K?
i suggested a plan to change things in one of my posts, and there are a few others on the web. none offer instant success. americans aren't interested in solutions that might succeed in a generation or two, the evils of fast food have infected the political process. so things will continue as they have been.
literacy has not proven to lift the level of political discussion, a nation that can read prefers not to. it wasn't always so: american women struggled for 3 generations to get parity with men in political status. too bad it was at the 'serf' level.
You got it right, brother (sister?). Our military is now the private army of the oil companies.
Just kidding
We should not be surprised at our continued aggression in Afghanistan as the plan was made clear prior to the election. Obama, like the leaders before him, now has the blood of innocents on his hands. The US is continuing their policy of aggression and domination. Although some of the characters have changed, it appears we are still following the same playbook.
I am wise enough to know that racism is real, but not naïve enough to believe that it is the root cause of all opposition to Obama. The sad thing is that the race card has only served to obscure the real issues.
President Obama has very little power he is fully depend on his party who are slave of these lobbies. So do not blame only to Obama, your whole system is nasty, change that system first. I know it is very very difficult to change this system because they have money and mas cal power and no one challenge to them.
If not, welcome to a life as a wage slave and don't offend the boss in any way. If there is a union at your place of employment there is a much better chance that you will receive a living wage. If you live in a red state chances are there will be no union because Repugnicans hate unions.
Free Market is a myth - the game has been rigged in favor of the rich from the very beginning. What do you expect if the rich have the congress bought and paid for.
There is no such thing as a free lunch - unless you are wealthy. See above.
Wars make money for the rich. Here's how it works: It starts with THE BIG LIE. Our young people are urged to join up and serve their country. When they come home in a coffin there it is time for the next BIG LIE. "They made the ultimate sacrifice in service for their country". The truth is they were Lied to and their lives were stolen from them. I wanna scream when they show pictures of the dead servicemen. They are VICTIMS of the Bush gang's war.
We are a nation of laws if you are not rich. Why aren't Bush, Cheney,Rumsfeld et alii in Pelican Bay where they belong?
So you see what Obama is up against and presumably he would like to survive the office... I was worried about that as soon as he started his run for the presidency.
I'm 68 yrs. old and have long since given up the idea that anyone could fix up this mess - I'd settle for some progress at least. Of course, McSame would have been an utter disaster.
I've been reading that third party and independent candidates are being looked to more because of people's disillusionment with the Dems and the Repubs. I sure hope that's true. We need third party candidates.
jane smithie redux
October 02, 2009 08:13 AM
----------------------------
Are you kidding us?!? Who had congressional majorities for 12 years? It wasn't the Dems. And I didn't see a whole lot of weeping by Repubs while they were in power.
As a matter of fact, I believe one of the major 'debates' was what constitutes torture. Another one was over denying funding to family planning in other countries because it might include (gasp) abortion.
Welcome to the 20th century. Neanderthals may be facing a second extinction. Rush can lead the way into the volcano of the 'End Times'.
I support him so far. I don't think it was ever reasonable to believe that electing a non-Repub would turn us into a pacifist nation. The wars we're in are not acceptable to me, but I think there's more of a chance to get out of them with Obama than with McCain. At least Obama's considering whether to send more troops to Afghanistan - with McCain, they'd have been there since Jan. You can't judge a whole Presidency in 8 mos, no matter how much hope you had for instant change going in.
Nader is a megalomaniac. Most third party folks are naive and incapable of changing things from the inside. Change will only happen from the inside unless you want blood in the streets. That sounds like the far right. The world is not set up for instant gratification. This sht takes time. To say otherwise sounds like those crazy rightist who are freaking that the sky is falling.
It's an ugly world and there is a real limit to how much can be changed and how quickly it can be changed. One of the main reasons that these hostile third world countries are having the success they are is that they don't even think in terms of winning a war in a decade, or sometimes even a generation. We need to think that way about rebuilding parts of the world that we have harmed. Think Japan post WWII. Yes, there were some of the worst atrocities committed from both sides, but the US went in and helped rebuild Japan with food and materials aid. The same needs to be tried with Afghanistan. Ultimately it will need to be done by the people themselves, but they have to buy into a culture of building and not warring.
With regard to all the things people expected Obama to do that have not been done, there is one thing you gloss over and another you give insufficient weight to. First, the famous words of the Obama campaign ("Yes, we can!"), even in their basic grammar, presuppose a large grassroots constituency driving the action. Once the election was over though, so was the activism of the statistical totality of Obama voters, content to leave everything to the messiah -- and in the vacuum created the lobbyists for moneyed interests walzted right in. Second, Obama always insisted that he was a gradualist; and while that is in some ways in keeping with the grass roots approach to things, in moments of major crisis gradualism is exactly wrong. Yet back to his days as a law school professor, community organizer, and even in the Illinois legislature, Obama was always a consensus-seeking gradualist. His temperment is to seek the slow evolution of policy, never mind "the fierce urgency of the the now."
On Afghanistan, you're absolutely correct about the moral cost and legal wrong of using predator drones the way they've been used in Afghanistan and increasingly in Pakistan. But, I would argue, you are dead wrong on the general policy question. Getting into Afghanistan was a large mistake, and leaving things where they are now and walking away makes things far worse than they were in 2001. Then, the Taliban provided safe haven for Osama bin Laden, but also generally had a thuggish grip deep into the countryside. Now, the government in Kabul is barely tolerated in that city and toothless beyond it, and large areas of the country are not only lawless but firmly in the hands of radicalized Taliban has a more global perspective than the 2001 government had.
The forces that assassinated Bhutto in Pakistan are the same radicalized tribal elements the U.S. and coalition forces have been working unsuccessfully to quell for eight years. And they are potentially very serious players in the FATA of Pakistan and beyond. Since the failed attempt of the government to impose its order on the pro-Taliban forces in the FATA, the reach and influence of those forces has grown at the expense of the secular government's. And let us forget neither that Pakistan is a nuclear weapon state and the stand of the Islamist radicals with regard to Kashmir -- which if followed would plunge nuclear-armed Pakistan into war with nuclear-armed India.
Without the large numbers of troops McChrystal is asking for, the Taliban and allied Pashtun forces will militarily defeat the U.S. -- which would be very bad, because it would embolden every plotter who thinks the U.S. can be taken, and one of them will be able to pull off something that makes the death toll on September 11th, 2001, look small by comparison.
But the purpose of more troops, as realy anyone who has a working knowledge of anti-insurgent strategy can grasp, is to control an area long enough to establish the type of physical, social, and economic infrastructure necessary to allow local populations the ability to choose whether or not to accede to requests or demands from Taliban or Taliban-allied fighters. In fact, the presence of such forces mitigate against the "need" to use predator drones against population centers.
For what it's worth. Obama knows just about nothing about military power and its use in various theaters and situations, so perforce has had to rely on established practice. That is neither an attempt to excuse or justify the moral and legal wrongs such policies entail. And it sure doesn't help that one of Obama's most trusted voices in foreign affairs is Joe Biden who, his years on the Foreign Relations Committe notwithstanding, still thinks a tripartite partition of Afghanistan is a good idea (which is sheer lunacy both from a simple strategic standpoint -- the Turks would never stand for it -- and because in 1991 Osama bin Laden predicted that the US would invade Iraq and establish a tripartite partition exactly along the lines Biden has proposed).
The majority of the comments in this thread premised on the ideological purity and rah-rahism that so disfigures both the left and the right. Ideological purity, the facts bedamned.
With regard to all the things people expected Obama to do that have not been done, there is one thing you gloss over and another you give insufficient weight to. First, the famous words of the Obama campaign ("Yes, we can!"), even in their basic grammar, presuppose a large grassroots constituency driving the action. Once the election was over though, so was the activism of the statistical totality of Obama voters, content to leave everything to the messiah -- and in the vacuum created the lobbyists for moneyed interests walzted right in. Second, Obama always insisted that he was a gradualist; and while that is in some ways in keeping with the grass roots approach to things, in moments of major crisis gradualism is exactly wrong. Yet back to his days as a law school professor, community organizer, and even in the Illinois legislature, Obama was always a consensus-seeking gradualist. His temperment is to seek the slow evolution of policy, never mind "the fierce urgency of the the now."
On Afghanistan, you're absolutely correct about the moral cost and legal wrong of using predator drones the way they've been used in Afghanistan and increasingly in Pakistan. But, I would argue, you are dead wrong on the general policy question. Getting into Afghanistan was a large mistake, and leaving things where they are now and walking away makes things far worse than they were in 2001. Then, the Taliban provided safe haven for Osama bin Laden, but also generally had a thuggish grip deep into the countryside. Now, the government in Kabul is barely tolerated in that city and toothless beyond it, and large areas of the country are not only lawless but firmly in the hands of radicalized Taliban has a more global perspective than the 2001 government had.
The forces that assassinated Bhutto in Pakistan are the same radicalized tribal elements the U.S. and coalition forces have been working unsuccessfully to quell for eight years. And they are potentially very serious players in the FATA of Pakistan and beyond. Since the failed attempt of the government to impose its order on the pro-Taliban forces in the FATA, the reach and influence of those forces has grown at the expense of the secular government's. And let us forget neither that Pakistan is a nuclear weapon state and the stand of the Islamist radicals with regard to Kashmir -- which if followed would plunge nuclear-armed Pakistan into war with nuclear-armed India.
Without the large numbers of troops McChrystal is asking for, the Taliban and allied Pashtun forces will militarily defeat the U.S. -- which would be very bad, because it would embolden every plotter who thinks the U.S. can be taken, and one of them will be able to pull off something that makes the death toll on September 11th, 2001, look small by comparison.
But the purpose of more troops, as realy anyone who has a working knowledge of anti-insurgent strategy can grasp, is to control an area long enough to establish the type of physical, social, and economic infrastructure necessary to allow local populations the ability to choose whether or not to accede to requests or demands from Taliban or Taliban-allied fighters. In fact, the presence of such forces mitigate against the "need" to use predator drones against population centers.
For what it's worth. Obama knows just about nothing about military power and its use in various theaters and situations, so perforce has had to rely on established practice. That is neither an attempt to excuse or justify the moral and legal wrongs such policies entail. And it sure doesn't help that one of Obama's most trusted voices in foreign affairs is Joe Biden who, his years on the Foreign Relations Committe notwithstanding, still thinks a tripartite partition of Afghanistan is a good idea (which is sheer lunacy both from a simple strategic standpoint -- the Turks would never stand for it -- and because in 1991 Osama bin Laden predicted that the US would invade Iraq and establish a tripartite partition exactly along the lines Biden has proposed).
The majority of the comments in this thread premised on the ideological purity and rah-rahism that so disfigures both the left and the right. Ideological purity, the facts bedamned.
And what power does Obama have? The same power any man can have: the power of the truth. And access to the greatest bully pulpit in the world. But since truth "offends" and he wants to "unite" he fails as both a President and as a person. Gandhi had nothing but his words and overthrew an empire. Obama has an empire but has no words.
And how fortuante for corporations that Americans will always unthinkingly blame their basically powerless presidents, especially the Democratic ones, and since the Republicans control the media, anyway, public opinion is easily manipulated. I refer readers yet again to my earlier series of posts on the most controlled population in the world: Americans, who are stupid enough to believe the "freedom, democracy, justice" crap no matter the overwhelming evidence to the contrary. And hey...stupidity deserves what it gets!!
Sometimes I marvel at how he stands up to all the vitriol, hatred, unrealistic expectations, racism, right-wing fanaticism, left-wing fanaticism, lies about him and those freakin' Blue Dog Dems.
From my POV, the guy is made of tungsten steel. Can we please give him a CHANCE? It's a gross error to lump him in with the greedy corporate profiteers that came before. To say that is just as dangerous as claiming he was born in Kenya. C'mon folks...some nuance, please.
Sheesh.
That aside, RATED, all the freaking way!
BBE, you speak the truth. People need to WAKE UP. PBS's Frontline has a rough cut of their next special, "Obama's War" up on their website. There will be NO winners in Af/Pak. EVER.
Nader and the Greens are insane, too. I love him, but the GP platform includes a reverse income tax, which is just retarded.
Meet the new boss. Same as the old boss.
It is controlled by big money making corporations nowadays. Both dems and rebs, even most of your small parties are controlled by the same corporations.
That system is killing people all over the world. The rest of the world is getting enough of it.
But you can still change it. I'm with Dennis Loo. You need to build new movements of people to change it.
I voted for Obama and think that he has been mostly talk and noise. I criticize him a lot. I think he was the best of the viable options. Throwing your vote away on Nader was........ Well, a waste.
But I support about 99% of what you said.
Keep up the good fight.
Monte
Ours is a very complex world, the US is the most complex "empire" the world has ever seen. To posit that Nader or heaven forbid Chomsky have any real skills at leadership or even intellectual integrity puts the poster and supportive commentors in the shallow end of the pool.
8 months. What in the wide world of sports did you expect to be accomplished in 8 months? I completely sympathize with the frustration; I too hope for a stealth progressive who can overcome congressional timidity, the 60 year old military-industrial stranglehold, the superstitious American public, the debasing of reason and critical thinking, the entrenched interests of Big Pharma/Insurance, the K street pirates, etc etc etc. Sure. 8 months. Why didn't he beat back all these guys by now? Uh-huh.
Trim tab, people. Large tankers and cruise ships would snap their rudders in minutes if they tried to steer with their rudders. They shift the trim tab first, get a new tendency going, THEN engage the rudder.
I love the passion for progressive causes. I share it. But to pair outrage here with a pretense, a veneer, of sober analysis and critical parsing cheapens the reasoning and makes childish the outrage. Waving our hands angrily at these colossal problems doesn't work, blaming one person for failing to solve them in 8 months is inane, and loading up pictures of dead children is a cheap gesture.
And all the nasty invective? Low rent. Our teachers were right, way back when: vitriol and foul are the sign of poor thinking and too many shortcuts.
We are in need of one, but a vote for Nadar was a vote for McCain and/or a vote for Obama. You may have kept your personal integrity intact, but in the end the colors faded in the wash. I voted for the Green Party candidate in the 2006 elections. We ended up having a run-off between the R and D.
You can name specific reasons, many of which I agree with especially the Patriot Act and the wars, you are unhappy with Obama, good for you. However, your specifics don't mean racism isn't some people's main issue with him. You should have left that part out because it seems as if you are denying it all together and it diluted your excellent points...especially about education and aid being what we should spend our money on overseas.
Change is kind of flavorless, like grits; it's all about what you put on it.
Here is a thought: We need a VALUE SYSTEM in order to act in a consistent manner. Right now all we have on both sides of the House is ISSUE-based politics. We react to "issues" and have no reference value system to guide us.
Don't "You Lie!"
that continues to make sure we have a one party system. since obviously there is no difference between dems and repubs, except the repubs tell the truth - they dont give a shit about the less fortunate. the dems lie and pretend they do.
in other words, at this point in time, the republicans have more integrity than the democrats.
goddamn. who would ever have thought it could come to this?
There's no way in hell we could have gotten a single-payer system through - we have 60 Democrats, but Big Health has billions of dollars with which to bribe those that can be bought. I think Obama's working on getting the public option through in the next phase (committee), and I think, indequate though it may be, this will be a remarkable achievement.
Regarding the opinion that there's no difference between parties: imagine if Al Gore had won in 2000. We wouldn't have been in Iraq at all, in my opinion. Environmental protections would have been strengthened, not repealed. Anti-American sentiment would not have exploded due to bullying by a stupid cowboy. Granted, there's not enough difference between parties, but it's naive to say that there's none.
BUT, again, thanks for this post. It makes a lot of good points, and pokes us in our complacency. AHC
Maybe we should have a board type system... where there is an elected board running the country... made up of people who are actually elected but not by the electoral system... by actual vote. And corporate and lobbyist contributions should be outlawed. Those running for the board positions should have to raise their own money and shouldn't be able to accept money from companies and lobbyists. It should be raised through individual contributions and fundraising events. And the Dems and Repubs need to give up their control of the whole damn thing.
This country is way too big and complex for a single person to be calling the shots. And people bitch about other countries that are communistic? What the hell do we have here... 2 political parties controlling everything... along with huge corporations and lobbyists? Is having a monopoly any different than communism or a dictatorship?
I applaud your entry for saying what you think, and illustrating your points from several sources. Food for thought.
Rated.
http://joshfulton.blogspot.com/2009/10/israeli-police-storm-jerusalems-holiest.html
Also, here's my post on Obama:
http://joshfulton.blogspot.com/2009/10/obama-wins-nobel-peace-prize-hell_10.html
I list plenty of additional reasons to be upset/disappointed/pissed off with Obama.
John was in the fertilized egg business. He had several hundred young layers (hens), called 'pullets,' and ten roosters to fertilize the eggs. He kept records, and any rooster not performing went into the soup pot and was replaced.
This took a lot of time so he bought some tiny bells and attached them to his roosters. Each bell had a different tone, he could tell from a distance which rooster was performing. Now he could sit on the porch and fill out an efficiency report just by listening to the bells. John's favorite rooster, old Butch, was a very fine specimen but this morning he noticed old Butch's bell hadn't rung at all!
When he went to investigate, he saw the other roosters were busy chasing pullets, bells-a-ringing, but the pullets, hearing the roosters coming, could run for cover. To John's amazement, old Butch had his bell in his beak, so it couldn't ring. He'd sneak up on a pullet, do his job, and walk on to the next one.
John was so proud of old Butch he entered him in the Renfrew County Fair where he became an overnight sensation among the judges. The result was the judges not only awarded old Butch the No Bell Piece Prize but they also awarded him the Pulletsurprise as well.
Clearly old Butch was a politician in the making. Who else but a politician could figure out how to win two of the most highly coveted awards on our planet by being the best at sneaking up on the populace and screwing them when they weren't paying attention.
Vote carefully next year, the bells are not always audible.
We live in a a super-saturated media environment and, while you have many valid points worthy of discussion, you would be well advised to break them down into separate posts that people can wrap their arms around.
This has been a problem for opposition forces for as long as there have been opposition forces. Simply put, too many arguments simply obscures the facts.
Most importantly, we need to stop analyzing the problem and start working on a solution. Obviously, the internet has changed everything and, far from being the scion of a new democracy, it may be the death knell for it inasmuch as it seems to be moving us toward direct democracy which is essentially direct dictatorship.
The problem is one of scope and scale. I will give just one example.
T. Boone Pickens misguidedly started promoting his concept of huge wind power farms, perpetuating the same death grip on energy that the oil barons had by simply replacing the oil with electricity. Recently, however, he has had to pull back on his commitment to wind and solar energy because the cost of building transmission lines for the electricity, along with the astronomical cost of the wind turbines and solar energy collectors, makes large scale projects of this nature economically unfeasible.
The problem is the scope and scale. Ten million roof-top wind powered generators on ten million homes would cost a fraction of what consolidated wind power farms would cost....and would sit on the existing power grid.
Promote this, along with localized solar and water power projects, and you can break through the hegemony of the capitalist system's enslavement effect. Owning the means of producing energy is the only real source of power in this civilization.
Now, that's an example of what I am talking about. Clean up your presentation, break down your thinking into a sequence of posts and you will get more done.
Keep goin', BBE. After the Ft. Hood incident today, who knows how the spin will come down. So many issues, such ignorant citizens.....
YOU ARE RIGHT ON TARGET.
CHECK OUT MY BLOGS SOMETIME.
THERE IS STRENGTH IN NUMBERS.
KEEP UP THE GOOD WORK AND GREAT BLOGGING.
This has been a rough year, but I can say this with absolute assurance: Under McCain it would have been infinitely worse.
Feel free to climb down off the cross, Mary - we need the wood.
~
We get more of the same. The Democrats are useless. The Republicans are just as bad, only they have more integrity -- you know they're out to fuck you, while the Democrats love to paint a beautiful picture and then fuck you.
And right now, I need to hold onto my hope that the man I elected is who I think he is, and that he'll be able to take those acts of courage required to move us toward a world of compassionate justice and opportunity. Now I have to go put cold packs on my eyes - too many years of sadness - I need my hope. And I love your heart.
You are absolutely right.
http://joshfulton.blogspot.com/2009/11/doj-are-dirty-fascistic-bastards-they.html
I am one with them
mark aleshnick
Here's something I've written that you might like to read, it basically got me thrown off of Oped News, where I had been contributing for almost a year (all of these 'alternative media websites' are just fronts for the Democratic Party IMO; with the exception of like a Counterpunch and a handful of others):
Barack Obama and the Banality of Evil
http://www.metamute.org/en/barack_obama_and_the_banality_of_evil
Official US Air Force Document Reveals the True Intentions Behind the US-Colombia Military Agreement
http://www.venezuelanalysis.com/analysis/4917
Chavez the current president is part Native America, Spanish, and he also has African ancestry. Why does Obama support white elite rule in Latin America? He has not been friendly to Evo Morales either, who is essentially his equal in Bolivia, Morales is the first indigenous person to be president of that country.
http://joshfulton.blogspot.com/2009/11/china-jails-dissidents-before-obama.html
Hope and Change. He didn't fail. The failure belongs to us.
You (all of you, every last one including myself) are too stupid, divided and weak to do a damn thing about it.
Don't blame Obama, place it where it belongs, on the shoulders of the plebes.
Besides, he's just the sock puppet to keep us busy while the shadow government runs the show.
Dow/Pharma/Haliburton
DPH forever baby!