Hey Dfunk..I can identify with your lack of hope regarding the choices on offer. I was part of the hopeful throng protesting the wto's agenda in Seattle in 1999. I witnessed first-hand the violent tactics employed by the authorities when they were faced with valid contradiction. The 1st amendment was seen in all its glory for what it was...debatable. While the debate was taking place it was outright suspended.
I have until recently played the game of better or worse in my own head when faced with unsavoury choices, and it's easy to see how sitting calmly and doing nothing i.e. looking after oneself, ones family and friends, seems so attractive. These so called choices don't feel like choices, it feels more like being coralled.
With regard to really thinking about the candidates TheBrutalTruth, what is really to think about? Neither candidate will offer anything that is both radical and to be celebrated. I'm sure that despite our differences(all the folks on these forums), there are certain things we would all agree on. Medical Babyjane would be a great start. It's radical, we all know it's right that people with health disadvantages should be free to use herbal messages from God or Richard Dawkins, but these people won't touch even that. Think about it folks, what would be the harm to the people who oppose medical Mj?... less control and less profit. I find it hard to imagine a decent American who would deny a sick person their medicine, but the choices on offer will continue to do so. We are asked to vote for people who would deny us the right to have our pain soothed and our minds opened in our very last days by a fucking PLANT. Pathetic.
The path is set folks, none of these pricks will steer us away from doom, we're a pheonix craning his neck in a vain attempt to blow out the flames on her arse. If Nader and Paul were going at it, then it would be worth involving thought.