Menu Bar
No Democracy in America
Needs Plugin: Flash |
Not Working?
Retweet This
Share on Facebook
Email This
Welcome to the future.
Oct 8, 2008 2:06 PM
Re: No Democracy in America
Nader should have gotten himself arrested. He ultimately sued and won a $50K judgement anyway. But if he'd allowed himself to be arrested on video, Nader's case would have received even more publicity and public support.
p.s. I'm not a Nader fan, but this clip is chilling. And I had no idea this insanity was going on back in 2000.
p.s. I'm not a Nader fan, but this clip is chilling. And I had no idea this insanity was going on back in 2000.
Re: No Democracy in America
Look at it from Machiavelli's POV: H Ross Perot screwed up the re-election campaign of George Bush in 92, then got Clinton re-elected in 96. In the Rove era, we can't have independent candidates, especially ones that rock the corporate system, messing up the "democratic" process, now can we?
Anheuser-Busch paid for the debates? WTF!
Anheuser-Busch paid for the debates? WTF!
Re: No Democracy in America
If Republicans are the ones who are controlling the debates, then they would have advocated Nader so that he could play the spoiler role that Perot did in '92.
Don't forget what the Hollywood left and Michael Moore did to Nader in '04. Has there ever been a more deliberate political backstabbing?
Don't forget what the Hollywood left and Michael Moore did to Nader in '04. Has there ever been a more deliberate political backstabbing?
By: poonhound
Re: No Democracy in America
Poonhound, what the heck are you talking about? :)
None of the frequent posters (aka nerds with no time on our hands like W_W, SV, loqi, myself, etc) have ever said Republicans control debates. Not one.
We have, much differently, pointed out that corporatists position themselves into influence and power regardless of party affiliation.
Only punters in a buffet line actually buy into these fakakta political parties any more.
As niktemadur astutely pointed out, the corporate powers are the ones who want to keep out third-party candidates because these wildcards might screw up the elections for either of their two horses in the race.
Republicans? Democrats? Come on, man. Bubba Clinton wasn't vetoing NAFTA. He destroyed jobs. Not to mention Mena, Arkansas, Waco, Texas, etc.
Sure the GOP decided to bring down Bubba. But did they use real allegations like Mena, Arkansas which would have crucified Clinton? Not even close. They whined about a beej from an intern.
The revolt against Clinton was only to give one-world folks like Cheney, Wolfowitz, etc full control of our so-called government (and very real tax dollars) so they could go hog wild. And boy, did they ever.
But did the Democrats stop 'em in the last two years? Nope. They voted with Bush more often than not.
So due to both parties' actions, we're now bankrupt with the government and the Fed taking control of the banks...
Remember, somewhere in your heart, when you were in favor of free market Capitalism and against Socialism? Sure, you do. I do, too.
So I'd like to make a recommendation. Maybe it's better to stop blindly following either party. This tired, old paradigm of fake party differences needs to be put to bed.
Now is the time when we all realize our similarities are more similar and our differences less so. We need to join together to effect change away from these two parties. And to stand against the corporate powers and their media arms behind them.
None of the frequent posters (aka nerds with no time on our hands like W_W, SV, loqi, myself, etc) have ever said Republicans control debates. Not one.
We have, much differently, pointed out that corporatists position themselves into influence and power regardless of party affiliation.
Only punters in a buffet line actually buy into these fakakta political parties any more.
As niktemadur astutely pointed out, the corporate powers are the ones who want to keep out third-party candidates because these wildcards might screw up the elections for either of their two horses in the race.
Republicans? Democrats? Come on, man. Bubba Clinton wasn't vetoing NAFTA. He destroyed jobs. Not to mention Mena, Arkansas, Waco, Texas, etc.
Sure the GOP decided to bring down Bubba. But did they use real allegations like Mena, Arkansas which would have crucified Clinton? Not even close. They whined about a beej from an intern.
The revolt against Clinton was only to give one-world folks like Cheney, Wolfowitz, etc full control of our so-called government (and very real tax dollars) so they could go hog wild. And boy, did they ever.
But did the Democrats stop 'em in the last two years? Nope. They voted with Bush more often than not.
So due to both parties' actions, we're now bankrupt with the government and the Fed taking control of the banks...
Remember, somewhere in your heart, when you were in favor of free market Capitalism and against Socialism? Sure, you do. I do, too.
So I'd like to make a recommendation. Maybe it's better to stop blindly following either party. This tired, old paradigm of fake party differences needs to be put to bed.
Now is the time when we all realize our similarities are more similar and our differences less so. We need to join together to effect change away from these two parties. And to stand against the corporate powers and their media arms behind them.
Re: No Democracy in America
You Will Follow A Party. It Has Been So Decreed From On High. You Must Mold Your Opinions Such That They Coincide With A Platform. Obey.
It'd be nice of people actually disagreed upon things they really disagree upon, without getting distracted by wedge issues.
It'd be nice of people actually disagreed upon things they really disagree upon, without getting distracted by wedge issues.
By: i8ursandwich
Re: No Democracy in America
You do realize it is the Congress that controls spending, not the president, right?
By: faxis2k
Re: No Democracy in America
In a purely technical sense. But in reality, spending is negotiated between Congress and the President.
By: quisph
Re: No Democracy in America
I can only hope that this will be the year for third parties.
By: bloorgg
Re: No Democracy in America
Forgive me if I am repeating myself in comments here, but even though I am no fan of Bob Barr, he's the only registered candidate for US President in Texas:
http://www.bobbarr2008.com/press/press-releases/108/barr-only-presidential-candidate-on-texas-ballot/
Let's just try to imagine if Ralph Nader or Jesse Ventura missed the deadline. They'd be told to wait another four years. McCain or Obama? They're mainstream (read: two party system that squeezes out the competition) and thus the deadlines don't apply.
Having lived in Texas for seven years of my adult life, I understand that there are some laws that apply differently simply because they were a republic before they became a state (mostly banking and traffic laws are the only ones that apply), but this is absurd. Getting out the vote means equal opportunity for representation not limiting choices.
http://www.bobbarr2008.com/press/press-releases/108/barr-only-presidential-candidate-on-texas-ballot/
Let's just try to imagine if Ralph Nader or Jesse Ventura missed the deadline. They'd be told to wait another four years. McCain or Obama? They're mainstream (read: two party system that squeezes out the competition) and thus the deadlines don't apply.
Having lived in Texas for seven years of my adult life, I understand that there are some laws that apply differently simply because they were a republic before they became a state (mostly banking and traffic laws are the only ones that apply), but this is absurd. Getting out the vote means equal opportunity for representation not limiting choices.
By: spam_vigilante
Re: No Democracy in America
I like how Republicans attribute Clinton's victory in '92 to H. Ross Perot being on the ballot, and Democrats say Bush "won" because Nader was on the ballot, yet neither of the two-party parties are willing to support ranked choice voting.
Just changing the ballot instructions to "rank your preferences from best to worst" rather than "choose one and only one from the list" would do away with the spoiler effect. But to the party bosses, losing elections that should've been theirs is preferable to slightly loosening their grip on the ballots.
And people swallow their bullshit about how anyone else who puts their name on the ballot is opening the door to the second-favorite guy getting elected.
Liars.
Just changing the ballot instructions to "rank your preferences from best to worst" rather than "choose one and only one from the list" would do away with the spoiler effect. But to the party bosses, losing elections that should've been theirs is preferable to slightly loosening their grip on the ballots.
And people swallow their bullshit about how anyone else who puts their name on the ballot is opening the door to the second-favorite guy getting elected.
Liars.
Re: No Democracy in America
The United States is a republic, not a democracy. There is a difference. Everyone in this forum needs to get a job and stop whining about how the government needs to carry their lazy asses along.
By: faxis2k
Re: No Democracy in America
1. The US is a democratic republic. Read a 12th grade history book.
2. I have a full-time job, so suck it.
3. Your comment appears to have no bearing on the thread, which means you're trying to be an ass.
4. There is no 4. Nooch.
2. I have a full-time job, so suck it.
3. Your comment appears to have no bearing on the thread, which means you're trying to be an ass.
4. There is no 4. Nooch.
By: luclonde
Re: No Democracy in America
All right... Who fed Gizmo after midnight?
Re: No Democracy in America
Ah, I see you're in the habit of reading my comments ...
