It is currently Fri Oct 31, 2014 4:33 pm

All times are UTC - 4 hours [ DST ]




Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 27 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2
Author Message
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Mon Jul 23, 2007 1:31 pm 
Offline
SuperMember!
SuperMember!
User avatar

Joined: Thu Mar 24, 2005 6:19 pm
Posts: 2533
Again dori you have placed human nature where it belongs- in tradition. We are in a race to get the best technology, not the best life for everyone. If we fall behind in the race we will lose our precious advantage, just like history teaches us.

Any way, here is the latest site I found on the candidates. It covers all the party potentials, from mainstream to oddball. I do notice that a lot of ex- senators are running as independants, so the field is expanding and some names are recognisable.

http://www.usa-2008.org/2008-presidenti ... idates.php

This seems more detailed and lays out everyones positon. Hope they keep posting new candidates as they come on board the SS minnow "for a four year cruise". :lol:

_________________
Completely sane world
madness the only freedom

An ability to see both sides of a question
one of the marks of a mature mind

People don't choose to be dishonest
the choice chooses them

Now I know how Kusinich feels.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Mon Jul 23, 2007 2:10 pm 
Offline
SuperMember!
SuperMember!
User avatar

Joined: Thu Oct 13, 2005 12:50 am
Posts: 1456
Location: Ct.
Very good site!!!.

Now if we can just get them all to write a book based on their philosophy of life we may be getting somewhere, a book that they must write themselves. (Bush would not have been able to run, incoherent sentences and all)

As a matter of fact....this should be a requirement, and required reading for anyone who wants to vote....and then the voter would have to take a test to prove that he actually knows who the hell he is voting for.

No more being able to vote in blind ignroance.

_________________
CrimsonEagle
The war to end all wars can only be fought on the front-lines of the mind.

The greatest deception they have perpetrated is that we need them. Our greatest mistake is that we believe them.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Tue Jul 24, 2007 9:22 am 
Offline
Moderator
Moderator
User avatar

Joined: Mon Jan 24, 2005 9:11 am
Posts: 5620
Location: western New York
They have some potential candidates, but I believe the potentials should be listed too.

In a wonderful world, third parties would be the answer. We don't live in a wonderful world.

What a third party is going to do is drain votes away from the candidates from the two MAJOR parties--the only ones we can count on actually being elected at this time.

Too much power in the buble called Washington has changed the people who 'represent' us, they no longer identify with the 'little people'. Edwards campaign is suffering because he is talking about the plight of the poor, and no one wants to identify with the poor. We want to sweep them under the rug and forget about them.

There just are no perfect people, period. All the Rs and half the Dems are corrupt and you can't have an honest system when it is being run by corrupt people. But just because someone does not belong to the two BIG parties does not mean they are any more honest or have any more integrity than the people we have now.

Quote:
you have placed human nature where it belongs- in tradition


I think our genetic make-up has a lot to do with our human nature and our human condition. Dolphins are better creatures than most humans. Most humans would be better people if they had better role models. My reference to the Bible just says greed, envy, selfishness, etc have been with us forever--yet it doesn't seem to be with dolphins.

If you could find me 535 dolphins for Congress and another 9 for the Supreme Court plus those positions of President, Vice President and all the trimmings in the White House, I would show you the perfect government make-up. As it is, we are stuck with humans and I will take most Democrats over any Republicans any day. And third parties will give us more Republicans despite the fix they are in today. Third parties will please the Rs no end!

Btw, I don't think dolphins would be willing to change places with humans in order to clean up our government. I think they are happier being dolphins. Smarter than your av.er.age human.

_________________
Libertarianism

Libertarianism Makes You Stupid


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Tue Jul 24, 2007 3:40 pm 
Offline
SuperMember!
SuperMember!
User avatar

Joined: Thu Mar 24, 2005 6:19 pm
Posts: 2533
I know. We can't get by our fixations so we are left to suffer with the lack of choices we now have. It would take a general turning away from convention, but do you trust your neighbour to do that. We are living in a system that has turned us against our neighbour, despite the bible's admonition to love and trust him and so we have let our two patrysystem reach its inevitable conclusion- total division of the country along party lines. That is why people must rise above their fears and take a lot more self-responsibility and self-actualization if they want to improve the way the world works. That way they will clearly see that to mire themselves in tradition is to stagnate.

And that is what American politics has become- stagnant- a cesspool of lies and dishonesty all in the name of personal greed.

Without at least dissenting voices who can get the message out? The talking heads that we see on these phony debates? Depending on them is just an exercise in futility as they go round and round in a circle game of pointless rhetoric.

The role of the independant should be to open up all areas of debate and they should be allowed equal air time to voice their opinions. Still no law in America that says you can't run for president, and the idea that they make a difference by splitting the vote is moot when you consider who counts the votes and what types of machinery they use for it. Without a paper tally, complaining that Nader stole the election is pointless. What proof do you need that elections are decided before election day? DIEBOLD enough?

Kingfisher, I hope you read the article on Ralph Nader and the mention of the swing arm assembly on the Corvair. The later models changed it when he pointed out it was dangerous, so I hope you have a later model Corvair. He won all lawsuits against him on that BTW. I guess the key is to not drive it like a sports car, but more like a mini luxury yacht.

_________________
Completely sane world
madness the only freedom

An ability to see both sides of a question
one of the marks of a mature mind

People don't choose to be dishonest
the choice chooses them

Now I know how Kusinich feels.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Sat Jul 28, 2007 12:51 am 
Offline
Moderator
Moderator
User avatar

Joined: Mon Jan 24, 2005 9:11 am
Posts: 5620
Location: western New York
Did someone say Nader stole the election? I missed that. I just don't believe one corrupt person is better than another.

_________________
Libertarianism

Libertarianism Makes You Stupid


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Tue Jul 31, 2007 8:36 pm 
Offline
SuperMember!
SuperMember!
User avatar

Joined: Thu Mar 24, 2005 6:19 pm
Posts: 2533
Everywhere I read it- it's a constant mantra from people, like he doesn't have the right to run. But knowing what we now know about the elections, it was a foregone exercise in futility, a show of hands without counting, whoever made the loudest noise, who counted the votes, who got caged etc. You name it, elections are a joke and American style democracy has made a banana republic look honest in comparison.

_________________
Completely sane world
madness the only freedom

An ability to see both sides of a question
one of the marks of a mature mind

People don't choose to be dishonest
the choice chooses them

Now I know how Kusinich feels.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Fri Feb 01, 2008 1:19 am 
Offline
SuperMember!
SuperMember!
User avatar

Joined: Thu Mar 24, 2005 6:19 pm
Posts: 2533
Well the news every democratic supporter fears is now a step closer to reality- Ralph Nader is thinking of running again for president. This will be his third time,and today on Democracy "Once-upon-a-time" today.

The interviews are important today because they start it with David Bonior, National campaign manager for John Edwards. He represented Michigan in Congress from 1976 to 2002. His review of Edwards run and what he thinks of Ralph are all well constructed and fair assessments.
The term Progressive it seems applies to Edwards and Nader more than Obama or Clinton, the establishment candidiates.

One thing about Edwards is that he once again quit before the real fight begins. How come he couldn't wait until Super Tuesday to decide to quit? And then his neutral stance- is that to show he wants the other candidates to continue to push his ideas until he makes a decision about who to back?

http://www.democracynow.org/2008/1/31/w ... overty_and
Quote:
Bonoir- There were a number of reports that you may have seen from nonprofit organizations and other media organizations that look at the media in terms of its balance, fairness and those kinds of things, and they show quite clearly that Obama and Clinton were getting six, seven times more press and coverage than John Edwards’s message was getting.

John Edwards also had a message that took on some of the corporations in this country, particularly the oil industry, the health insurance industry and the pharmaceutical industry, and others. And he was a threat to a lot of corporate America. So both of that, I think, helped keep his message to a level which unfortunately didn’t reach enough people.


Amy goes on to introduce Ralph Nader-

Quote:
Ralph Nader launched a presidential exploratory committee to decide whether to run as an independent. Ralph Nader ran on the Green ticket in ’96 and 2000, as an independent in 2004, which would make him three-time presidential candidate. On his website, Ralph Nader is urging supporters to “discipline the corporate crooks and lobbyists and their corporate candidates." He joins us now in Washington, D.C. in studio.

Ralph Nader, what are your plans?

RALPH NADER: Well, I’ve launched the exploratory committee with a website, naderexplore08.org, for those who want to get more details, in order to test the waters in three areas. One is to see if we have an adequate number of volunteers to run a robust fifty-state campaign that would include a network of pro bono lawyers to deal with the obstruction to ballot access that the Democrats engaged in in ’04, filing twenty-three lawsuits against us in just twelve weeks in that year, most of which we won. And second, to get adequate resources, contributions, donations—obviously, we’re not taking any money from corporate sources or political action committees. And that’s possible on the website naderexplore08.org. And finally, to get a talented, committed staff that connects with people’s daily lives and that can help organize one thousand people in each congressional district, not just for ’08, but also for ’09 and later. Congress really is the pivot institution that is most susceptible to change by popular forces, and, of course, it’s the most powerful branch of our government, if they care to use that power, like the impeachment power or the war declaration power under our Constitution.

Nader has some nice things to say about Edwards and don't forget he stated that he would run if Hillary seems to be the winner-
Quote:
Amy- ...Nader—you had said that “Edwards now has the most progressive message across a broad spectrum of any leading candidate I’ve seen in years,” while he was running. Are you coming in because he just left and you saw this progressive stance dropping out of the race?

RALPH NADER: Well, I didn’t expect John Edwards to drop out so quickly, because he said for weeks that he was going to go all the way to the convention, and there were reports that he was going to have enough delegates to perhaps broker the convention between, say, Obama and Clinton. So that was rather disappointing. But the signs were clear that he was coming in third. So he did provide a very good service in focusing on poverty, which was a no-no word for years by the Democratic Party, including President Clinton. He would always refer to the middle class as if he didn’t have fifty million men, women and children in dire poverty in the country’s—in the world’s richest country.

AMY GOODMAN: I wanted to—

RALPH NADER: So I think there’s never enough forces of justice, Amy. There’s never enough forces of justice to combat the concentration of power in the hands of the few used against the many in our country, representing giant corporations who basically have turned Washington into corporate-occupied territory.

AMY GOODMAN: David Bonior, your response to the possible run of Ralph Nader for president of the United States?

DAVID BONIOR: Well, I’ve always been an admirer of Ralph Nader and his record, his long record, as he has just indicated, over forty-something years, and his work as a public citizen has just been one of the more outstanding efforts in this country on behalf of working folks and social and economic justice. So, you know, I really admire his work and his voice. And we need voices like Ralph Nader’s in this country speaking up on these issues. .......And so, Ralph has a long record—there’s no doubt about that—the longest probably of any progressive in this country, but there are others we need to bring along, and young people, of course, are one in which he’s after, obviously, with his website and his entrée to the race. And—

AMY GOODMAN: And what do you think, David Bonior, of Ralph Nader running for president? What do you think it would mean for the presidential race in this country?

DAVID BONIOR: I think it’s always important to have voices that express progressive views and populist views. I mean, I’m glad Ron Paul—I mean, I don’t agree with Ron Paul on very many things. In fact, you know, it’s wherever the ’tween shall meet. When we were in the House together, we used to actually vote on things together, because we came from a different perspective.

AMY GOODMAN: So would you encourage Ralph Nader to run?

DAVID BONIOR: I’m sorry, I can’t hear you.

AMY GOODMAN: Would you encourage Ralph Nader to run?

DAVID BONIOR: That’s Ralph’s decision. And I’ll—we’ll watch and see how this develops, and we’ll watch and see how the other candidates respond in the Democratic race.


The interview continues with Ralph and Amy about halfway down after the Bonoir interview they repeated here-http://www.democracynow.org/2008/1/31/ralph_nader_launches_presidential_exploratory_committee

His response to being a "Spoiler"-
Quote:
RALPH NADER: Well, if you ask Al Gore, he’ll give you ten reasons, each of which independently was a cause of his losing. He believes he won—I agree he won—in Florida, but it was stolen from him before, during, and after the election by the Secretary of State and Jeb Bush, all the way from Tallahassee to that atrocious political decision by the Supreme Court. There are a lot of “what if’s,” Amy. What if he got Tennessee? What if he got Arkansas? What if the mayor of Florida didn’t go to Madrid and not bring out thousands of his votes?

Anybody who looks at an independent or third party candidate, whether it’s a Green Party candidate or Independent Party candidate, and uses the words "Are you taking away votes from the Democrats?” in my view, is basically saying that small party candidates are second-class citizens. Either we have an equal right to run for elective office in our country, or we are basically developing a two-tier system, where the two dominant parties, with all their commercial support, control the votes in this country. So either none of us are spoilers, because we have an equal right to run, or all of us, because we’re trying to take votes from one another, are spoilers. There’s no stratification. When that word “spoiler” is used to attach to a small party candidate, that, to me, is clear political bigotry, just as if it was used against a class of voters years ago during the pre-civil rights era. So I think ballot access is a major civil liberties issue, and people in this country, whether they like it or not, must recognize how discriminatory that word is and must try to adhere to what the polls tell us, that they really want more voices and choices and that about 60 percent of the people of this country want a viable third party, even though they may not vote for that party.

So we have to get over it, and liberals especially have got to get over their easy abdication of least-worst voting for the Democrats, where they don’t put any pressure or they don’t make any demands on the Democrats, because they fear that the Republicans are worse. That sets up a system where the corporations are pulling 24/7 the Democrats in their direction to become corporate Democrats, like the corporate Republicans, and no one is pulling the other way. Why? Because they’re all freaked out by the Republicans, and they’re going for least-worst voting. All the bargaining power of progressives and liberals atrophy with that attitude.

So if they don’t want to support a small party candidate, if they don’t want to go to our website, naderexplore08.org, and see the reasons in that remarkable letter by my supporters that’s on that website, see the reasons why we are testing the waters, then they at least have to make demands on the Democratic Party, which they did not make in ’00 against Gore and they did not make against John Kerry. In fact, they had a moratorium on demonstrations against the war in ’04.


Don't think one can argue with him here or are we a country that restricts candidates for president, like the two parties do to their own and the media does as well at their discretion. Doesn't give one much faith in the electoral procedures that have developed does it?

Read what he thinks of Obama and Clinton as they both fit the definition of protective imitation.

Quote:
They’re too close to Hillary Clinton. Hillary Clinton is a corporate Democrat. There’s no better evidence of that than the Fortune magazine cover story in June of last year, which basically said business loves Hillary. Hillary is a big business candidate.

And so, I think the healthcare proposal is a perfect example by Barack Obama of this protective imitation. Why doesn’t he go for full Medicare? Why doesn’t he go for a deeper analysis of the healthcare problem in this country, namely the need to emphasize prevention of disease and trauma, the need to knock out $220 billion of billing fraud and abuse, according to the Government Accountability Office and Malcolm Sparrow at Harvard University, against the need to reduce malpractice and stop blocking action to go to the courts for the tens of thousands of people who are injured or killed because of the small percentage of reckless doctors operating in this country who should have their license suspended? He should also focus on the enormous administrative expense savings from full Medicare—one payer, not 1,500 payers and cross-billings, etc., that are now taking about $300 billion to $400 billion.

If Obama is the black candidate that cares for the poor of both races he should be the one to enact full medicare coverage for all and see what it gets him. There's a lot of poor people who would consider him a strong candidate for their interests. but then again, why encourage the poor to vote- and for their own interests as well. :roll:

Great interviews- go to the second URL to get both in one posting.

The race is getting interesting. Would you go for an Obama/Edwards ticket?

_________________
Completely sane world
madness the only freedom

An ability to see both sides of a question
one of the marks of a mature mind

People don't choose to be dishonest
the choice chooses them

Now I know how Kusinich feels.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Fri Feb 01, 2008 10:49 pm 
Offline
SuperMember!
SuperMember!
User avatar

Joined: Wed Feb 09, 2005 1:53 am
Posts: 2541
Location: Illinois
Oh goodie. The guy who gave us George W. Bush is now going to attempt to give us John "10,000 years in Iraq, and many more wars" McCain. I wonder if he will be taking campaign contributions from Republican PACs, like he did in 2004.

Image


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Sat Feb 02, 2008 2:09 pm 
Offline
SuperMember!
SuperMember!
User avatar

Joined: Thu Mar 24, 2005 6:19 pm
Posts: 2533
You just never know- he might even bring some sense of truth to an otherwise phony election set up by spin doctors too!

Check out this fine example of empire building thanks to the lying media, and who benefits from behind the scenes underhanded tactics. Even Perot can be useful, so why not Nader or McKinney or anyone else who has the money to prove capitalisms goals of control. After all there are at least a 10,000 dirty tricks that anyone can perform and hide behind- Why not whoever has the money can buy their way through anything. Works for America.

Spin- One of the most important films in the last 25 years= 1992-2007
http://www.brasschecktv.com/page/43.html
Still trust your media? Still trust Politics? Yes? Then you're happily revolving in the spin zone and have joined the rest of the Whirrled.

The main candidates have no intention of changing anything so whats your validation for change in any way. Perhaps another voice where others have been silenced will make some difference. At least Ron Paul is still speaking, unlike the other main voices of reason being squeezed out by force from their so called democratic rights, by such things as money and no doubt media and caucus pressures.

Who will carry a progressive message now? The four stooges? Larry, Moe, Shemp and Curly are now Romney, McCain, Obama and Clinton, in that order. What hilarious slapstick though. The spun zone. :lol: :roll:

Injecting some sense of truth and reality would be a breath of real fresh air in this pantomime to the presidency. Maybe thats why Nader and Paul stuck it out when others ran. Again! Chickenshithawks. Hiding behind lack of funding. Seems they may have wasted it thinking they had a chance, when a voice for the people is much more important. Of course the media will be there to make sure they remain good and ignored, so what's the problem? It will work for you too, when it has too or is paid to.

That defines fair and balanced in America. Everyone gets a say. Yay freedom! :roll: :brave: :laughing5: :evil3: :violent2:

_________________
Completely sane world
madness the only freedom

An ability to see both sides of a question
one of the marks of a mature mind

People don't choose to be dishonest
the choice chooses them

Now I know how Kusinich feels.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Sat Feb 02, 2008 3:00 pm 
Offline
SuperMember!
SuperMember!
User avatar

Joined: Wed Feb 09, 2005 1:53 am
Posts: 2541
Location: Illinois
I happen to agree with 95% of everything Nader says. Before 1998, I would have voted for him. However, the Republicans finally convinced me they are certifiably insane when they, first impeached a president for a blow job, and then used their fascist majority on the Supreme Court to protect George W. Bush from the Florida voters.

I decided to help remove the maniacal authoritarians from power, then we can hash things out between the rest of us. The Republicans could well be on the way to joining their Federalist predecessors on the scrap heap of history. In that case, I would fully expect a true progressive party to split from the Democrats and become a viable option.

Image


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Sat Feb 02, 2008 6:39 pm 
Offline
SuperMember!
SuperMember!
User avatar

Joined: Thu Mar 24, 2005 6:19 pm
Posts: 2533
You should research the demise of the conservative party here in Canada and it's rebirth as something new but the same, only with a western revolt attitude. The hydra's head may be cut, but it comes back twice as heady and impossible to kill. I mean Bush a two term president? How bad does politics have to get before people really do something to this lot of criminals.

Hopefully the third party candidates can add to the rhetoric and point out the shortcomings of both parties. whatever happens in the election will be scheduled to happen anyway so be prepared for more dirty tricks and false accusations that never get answered.

Hope you watched that video. Lots to say behind the scenes that explains their fronts. What a putz Larry King is, Eh? And Katie Kouric? Establishmentarianists!! Clintons tactics!! Perot in on it!! Nuff said!

_________________
Completely sane world
madness the only freedom

An ability to see both sides of a question
one of the marks of a mature mind

People don't choose to be dishonest
the choice chooses them

Now I know how Kusinich feels.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Sat Jun 28, 2008 3:26 am 
Offline
SuperMember!
SuperMember!
User avatar

Joined: Thu Mar 24, 2005 6:19 pm
Posts: 2533
Quote:
Obama Rejects Nader Criticism on “Talking White”
Meanwhile Obama has engaged in his first public spat with independent presidential candidate Ralph Nader following Nader’s criticism of his campaign. In an interview with the Rocky Mountain News, Nader said Obama is trying to appease white voters while ignoring African-Americans.

Ralph Nader: “There’s only one thing different about Barack Obama when it comes to being a Democratic presidential candidate. He’s half African-American. Whether that will make any difference, I don’t know. I haven’t heard him have a strong crackdown on economic exploitation in the ghettos. Payday loans, predatory lending, asbestos, lead. What’s keeping him from doing that? Is it because he wants to talk white? He doesn’t want to appear like Jesse Jackson? We’ll see all that play out in the next few months and if he gets elected afterwards.”

On Wednesday, Obama dismissed Nader’s criticism.

Sen. Barack Obama: “What’s clear is, Ralph Nader hasn’t been paying attention to my speeches. Ralph Nader is trying to get attention. He has become the perennial political candidate. I think it’s a shame, because if you look at his legacy in terms of consumer protections it’s an extraordinary one. But at this point, he’s somebody who’s trying to get attention and his campaign hasn’t gotten any traction."


Dodge city is not unknown to the Obama I Slama. What a con job! :roll:
And you believe this liar? Two tones still lie!


Nader for prez- our only hope against AMERICANISM!!!

_________________
Completely sane world
madness the only freedom

An ability to see both sides of a question
one of the marks of a mature mind

People don't choose to be dishonest
the choice chooses them

Now I know how Kusinich feels.


Top
 Profile  
 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 27 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2

All times are UTC - 4 hours [ DST ]


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum

Search for:
Jump to:  
Blue Moon by Trent © 2007
Powered by phpBB © 2000, 2002, 2005, 2007 phpBB Group