Obama's out

Seamaiden

Seamaiden

Well-Known Member
shamegame said:
Vote McCain. Even if you are democrat. He is the only one of the 3 frontrunners that has actually done anything good for this country. He served in the military and payed a huge price. What have Billary or B. Hussein Obama done for this country except fundraise and step on heads ?

He is not going to be a bush clone- his POW experience will keep him from invading a nation everytime they sneeze. I know the choice isn't easy, but this is what I am doing unless some last minute news breaks and I find out McCain was arrested in a hotel room in D.C. for buying cocaine from Al Sharpton or something.
Click to expand...

Are you sure about that? One of the big reasons McCain couldn't get a toehold in his previous campaigns is because he came off like a crackpot. Now, his rhetoric is de rigeur.
McCain won't rule out pre-emptive war - Yahoo! News

Don't forget also that McCain's already been involved in plenty of underhanded crap, like the savings and loan bailout so many years ago. There are very few candidates whose records are clean and whose voting records (one of THE most important litmus tests for me) stand up under scrutiny. Ron Paul at least does what he says he'll do, and while there are a few issues on which I vehemently disagree with him (abortion is one), I still feel that he's the best candidate who has the best understanding of our economy and political structure, yet who will also act with the type of integrity that has colored his entire career.

Check out OpenDNS (that's on the issues dot org) to check out voting records. Obama voted to fund the war, as has Hillary (I'd much rather have Obama in the Whitehouse than Hillary OR McCain). Then, if you do some searching of the Chicago Union-Tribune you'll find some dirt on Obama's politics as state senator. His hands are not clean, either. The only other candidate who at LEAST showed integrity was Dennis Kucinich.
 
medicineman

medicineman

New Member
Seamaiden said:
Are you sure about that? One of the big reasons McCain couldn't get a toehold in his previous campaigns is because he came off like a crackpot. Now, his rhetoric is de rigeur.
McCain won't rule out pre-emptive war - Yahoo! News

Don't forget also that McCain's already been involved in plenty of underhanded crap, like the savings and loan bailout so many years ago. There are very few candidates whose records are clean and whose voting records (one of THE most important litmus tests for me) stand up under scrutiny. Ron Paul at least does what he says he'll do, and while there are a few issues on which I vehemently disagree with him (abortion is one), I still feel that he's the best candidate who has the best understanding of our economy and political structure, yet who will also act with the type of integrity that has colored his entire career.

Check out OpenDNS (that's on the issues dot org) to check out voting records. Obama voted to fund the war, as has Hillary (I'd much rather have Obama in the Whitehouse than Hillary OR McCain). Then, if you do some searching of the Chicago Union-Tribune you'll find some dirt on Obama's politics as state senator. His hands are not clean, either. The only other candidate who at LEAST showed integrity was Dennis Kucinich.
Click to expand...
Sorry, Ron paul is old news. Pack him up and put him on the shelf till next time and come on out and play.
 
undertheice

undertheice

Well-Known Member
ViRedd said:
I was wondering though, have you considered that if you don't register to vote you eliminate your chance of serving on jury duty? IMHO, jury duty is one of our most important civic duties. It is from the jury box that we can nullify illegal and unconstitutional politician law.

Vi
Click to expand...
i'm called up all the time. voter registration isn't the only way they get of your name. i actually don't mind it as much as some, at least it's direct interaction with the law instead of legislation by proxy.
 
Seamaiden

Seamaiden

Well-Known Member
Jury duty lists are not only generated from voter registration lists, DMV records are another means, as are property tax records.

medicineman said:
Sorry, Ron paul is old news. Pack him up and put him on the shelf till next time and come on out and play.
Click to expand...
I'm different from a lot of people, MM. I vote my conscience, not who I think has the best chance of winning. I scour the net, the library, every source of information I can find, instead of waiting for MSM to spoonfeed me what I'm supposed to know.

I know he doesn't have a rat's chance in hell of making it. However, his message is powerful and he still speaks to me. Therefore, as always, I vote my conscience and with the best and most information I can gather, then go from there.
 
undertheice

undertheice

Well-Known Member
medicineman said:
And I sure don't want to be blamed for this fucked up world, so by me not voting, I can live in a harvest of peace and harmony.
Click to expand...
no matter what you may think of my way of life, if you've been paying any attention at all you'll realize that i tend to take responsibility for everything that touches my life. i may not be immersed in the society around me, but i still influence it through my actions. you may take some perverse pleasure in casting your ballot and then bitching when your wishes are ignored, but i see little point in legitimizing a broken system in that way.

i guess i don't live in that world of blame you seem to revel in and there's surely no more peace and harmony here than anywhere else. i just choose to live as though there were. instead of fighting over whose side will bully the other into accepting their ideas, i choose to try to spread my ideas through discussion and example. instead of joining in the game of forcing others to bend to the will of a few, i choose to hold on tightly to my freedoms and willingly clean up the mess once the games are through.

do you really think it's easy, waiting for fools to decide which way the wind will blow this season? all the time knowing that we'll end up in the same place no matter which sleazy politician takes the next turn at bat.
 
john.roberts85

john.roberts85

Well-Known Member
undertheice said:
no matter what you may think of my way of life, if you've been paying any attention at all you'll realize that i tend to take responsibility for everything that touches my life. i may not be immersed in the society around me, but i still influence it through my actions. you may take some perverse pleasure in casting your ballot and then bitching when your wishes are ignored, but i see little point in legitimizing a broken system in that way.

i guess i don't live in that world of blame you seem to revel in and there's surely no more peace and harmony here than anywhere else. i just choose to live as though there were. instead of fighting over whose side will bully the other into accepting their ideas, i choose to try to spread my ideas through discussion and example. instead of joining in the game of forcing others to bend to the will of a few, i choose to hold on tightly to my freedoms and willingly clean up the mess once the games are through.

do you really think it's easy, waiting for fools to decide which way the wind will blow this season? all the time knowing that we'll end up in the same place no matter which sleazy politician takes the next turn at bat.
Click to expand...
How long have you been a socialist?
 
undertheice

undertheice

Well-Known Member
john.roberts85 said:
How long have you been a socialist?
Click to expand...
how does one go about being an anarchist and a socialist at the same time? it would seem that vesting all power in the state at the same time you are trying to tear it down would be rather counterproductive. though communism may be considered to be a branch of socialism, their goals and practice are antithetical. those who try to marry socialism and anarchism do so by replacing government with other institutions, as if changing a thing's name will change its change its nature.
 
john.roberts85

john.roberts85

Well-Known Member
undertheice said:
how does one go about being an anarchist and a socialist at the same time? it would seem that vesting all power in the state at the same time you are trying to tear it down would be rather counterproductive. though communism may be considered to be a branch of socialism, their goals and practice are antithetical. those who try to marry socialism and anarchism do so by replacing government with other institutions, as if changing a thing's name will change its change its nature.
Click to expand...
Most schools of anarchist thought are socialist, with anarcho-syndicalism being the most dominant. :joint:
 
medicineman

medicineman

New Member
john.roberts85 said:
Most schools of anarchist thought are socialist, with anarcho-syndicalism being the most dominant. :joint:
Click to expand...
I think he's just a cynic. The process of involving himself is just too much as he sees he has no chance of changing anything, as I said, a Cop-Out. What happened to "at least I tried"?
 
ViRedd

ViRedd

New Member
This discussion reminds me of the person (I forget who) that tried to make the point here in the forum that Noam Chomsky is a Libertarian.

Vi
 
Seamaiden

Seamaiden

Well-Known Member
Undertheice, while I don't completely agree with what you're doing, I can completely appreciate that you're doing it very consciously. You have well thought-out reasons for acting as you do.
 
medicineman

medicineman

New Member
john.roberts85 said:
I think he supports anarcho-syndicalism.
Click to expand...
Anarcho-syndicalism is a branch of anarchism which focuses on the labour movement.[1] Syndicalisme is a French word meaning "trade unionism" – hence, the "syndicalism" qualification. Anarcho-syndicalists view labour unions as a potential force for revolutionary social change, replacing capitalism and the State with a new society democratically self-managed by workers. Anarcho-syndicalists seek to abolish the wage system, regarding it as "wage slavery," and state or private ownership of the means of production, which they believe lead to class divisions. (Not all seek to abolish wages per se. Ralph Chaplin states that "the ultimate aim of the General Strike as regards wages is to give to each producer the full product of his labor. The demand for better wages becomes revolutionary only when it is coupled with the demand that the exploitation of labor must cease.")[2] Anarcho-syndicalism remains a popular[citation needed] and active school of Anarchism today and has many[citation needed] supporters as well as many currently active organizations. Many contemporary anarchists argue[citation needed] that Anarcho-Syndicalism is more of an anarchist workplace organizational structure than an economic system in and of itself. Anarcho-syndicalist trade unionists differ on anarchist economic arrangements from a Collectivist anarchism type economic system to an Anarcho-Communism type economic system.[3] Historically most anarcho-syndicalists were/are also anarcho-communists (such as Lucy Parsons) or anarcho-collectivists (such as Buenaventura Durruti) but there have been many anarcho-syndicalists who preferred mutualist-type economic arrangements such as Joseph Labadie.

Could be. Sounds like a plan. I'd probably vote for it.
 
undertheice

undertheice

Well-Known Member
medicineman said:
I think he's just a cynic. The process of involving himself is just too much as he sees he has no chance of changing anything....
Click to expand...
i'm perfectly willing to admit to a certain amount of cynicism, but i also have a great deal of faith in man's more positive aspects (after all, i can even see a tiny bit of good in you:mrgreen:). i wouldn't even bother dealing with most folks i come across if i didn't believe they were capable of understanding a kind gesture and passing it along. my involvement is constant. however, instead of backing thieves in their quest for power, i prefer to lend my support to private charities that actually make a difference in the world and to never shirk my responsibility to aid those around me. i like to think that i change things in my own way, by striving to always conduct my affairs in an honest fashion and giving of myself (instead of forcing others to give) whenever possible. it seems to me that the true cynic is the one who feels that people must be manipulated and legislated into doing good.
 
undertheice

undertheice

Well-Known Member
medicineman said:
Anarcho-syndicalism is a branch of anarchism which focuses on the labour movement....
Click to expand...
the shorter version is that anarcho-syndicalism seeks to replace governmental authority with the authority of labor unions. when first developed the unions were a force for positive change in a world filled with oppressive management that had no oversight and was backed by the full might of government.they were controlled directly by the workers and were true communalist organizations. they have since become as corrupt as those they were formed to fight.

trading one form of corruption for another seems a waste of time and energy.
 
medicineman

medicineman

New Member
undertheice said:
the shorter version is that anarcho-syndicalism seeks to replace governmental authority with the authority of labor unions. when first developed the unions were a force for positive change in a world filled with oppressive management that had no oversight and was backed by the full might of government.they were controlled directly by the workers and were true communalist organizations. they have since become as corrupt as those they were formed to fight.

trading one form of corruption for another seems a waste of time and energy.
Click to expand...
Although I can lend credibility to your assertion, Unions, though corrupt, still offer a modicum of job protection that may not be afforded otherwise. The corporate structure is no less ruthless towards their employees than in the past. There is just a lot less press about their shennanigans. I worked Union jobs most of my working life and recieved a fairly decent living from them. I now recieve a pension from the teamsters that helps supplement my meager SS checks and am very thankful. I believe that within the confines of work I did, that without unions, the wages and benefits would have been much less. IE the fact that housing construction wages have gone from 25.00 an hr to 10-12 an hr with the introduction of Illegals may be a clue. This is the conscience of corporations. Also, notice that at no time did the prices of new homes go down, untill the bubble burst.
 
john.roberts85

john.roberts85

Well-Known Member
undertheice said:
the shorter version is that anarcho-syndicalism seeks to replace governmental authority with the authority of labor unions. when first developed the unions were a force for positive change in a world filled with oppressive management that had no oversight and was backed by the full might of government.they were controlled directly by the workers and were true communalist organizations. they have since become as corrupt as those they were formed to fight.

trading one form of corruption for another seems a waste of time and energy.
Click to expand...
Theoretically, joining wouldn't be compulsory, and you could have rotating labor boards. :joint:
 
mockingbird131313

mockingbird131313

Well-Known Member
WASHINGTON - Republican Sen. John McCain has erased Sen. Barack Obama's 10-point advantage in a head-to-head matchup, leaving him essentially tied with both Democratic candidates in an Associated Press-Ipsos national poll released Thursday
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top