HomeLatest ThreadsGreatest ThreadsForums & GroupsMy SubscriptionsMy Posts
DU Home » Latest Threads » Forums & Groups » Main » General Discussion (Forum) » An open letter to folks l...

Fri Sep 21, 2012, 05:36 PM

 

An open letter to folks like myself who cannot in good conscience vote for Obama

Note: I would ask that the pro-Obama folk refrain from insulting me until they have actually read what I am saying here.Thanks!.

Dear distraught fellow progressive:

If you are like me, the last four years have been a time of frustration, anger and sadness. Despite all the promises from Candidate Obama about "hope and change", President Obama, for whatever reason, failed to make significant changes on a variety of issues of moral imperative.

Rather than argue these points (yet again) and suffer accusations of being, at best, "naive" and at worst, a "secret Romney shill", I wish to suggest a means of resolving the issue ethically to (hopefully) everyone's satisfaction.

All other issues aside, the only hope Romney has of winning this election is by voter suppression, both "legal" and illegal. In my own state of North Carolina, a Tea Party corporation masquerading as a "non-partisan, non-profit" group protecting our election process from "fraud" tried to have 30,000 voters purged from the rolls, claiming that these people were dead. This forced our state board of election to waste time, money and resources disproving their idiotic claim.

(For more on this story, watch this RMS story)

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/21134540/vp/49112935#49112935

Obviously more of this tactic is taking place, and more is on the way.

The right of a citizen to vote is sacrosanct and the worst thing any other person can do is negate that right. No matter what our point of view, we should be allowed to vote for whom we please.

With this in mind, I have decided that I shall cast a vote for President Obama as a proxy for some person who will be denied that right by corporate sponsored goons, religious zealots, and anti-democratic political groups.

This is my choice, and one made after much soul-searching. I do not exhort anyone else to do what I am doing, but I do ask that they consider my reasoning.

And for those people who have been quite vociferous in their opinion of people like me who had planned to abstain from voting for President Obama as a matter of ethical/moral objection, please be as strident in pressing the President back to doing what is right, not what is expedient, should he win the election.

I hope this proposal will resolve this very contentious issue between myself and some of my fellow liberals.

Most respectfully proposed,

David Allen (Not Skinner)
aka Kelvin Mace

537 replies, 161435 views

Reply to this thread

Back to top Alert abuse

Always highlight: 10 newest replies | Replies posted after I mark a forum
Replies to this discussion thread
Arrow 537 replies Author Time Post
Reply An open letter to folks like myself who cannot in good conscience vote for Obama (Original post)
Kelvin Mace Sep 2012 OP
Cooley Hurd Sep 2012 #1
Kelvin Mace Sep 2012 #26
Cooley Hurd Sep 2012 #44
Kelvin Mace Sep 2012 #55
nanabugg Sep 2012 #299
Kelvin Mace Sep 2012 #342
spanone Sep 2012 #2
HiPointDem Sep 2012 #17
librechik Sep 2012 #19
uponit7771 Sep 2012 #66
HiPointDem Sep 2012 #70
GaYellowDawg Sep 2012 #77
Tarheel_Dem Sep 2012 #161
HiPointDem Sep 2012 #170
Tarheel_Dem Sep 2012 #171
HiPointDem Sep 2012 #172
eridani Sep 2012 #452
tavalon Sep 2012 #178
Kelvin Mace Sep 2012 #346
Tarheel_Dem Sep 2012 #348
Kelvin Mace Sep 2012 #124
BlueCaliDem Sep 2012 #304
Kelvin Mace Sep 2012 #347
blue neen Sep 2012 #373
Kelvin Mace Sep 2012 #376
blue neen Sep 2012 #378
Kelvin Mace Sep 2012 #383
blue neen Sep 2012 #388
GaYellowDawg Sep 2012 #75
Hippo_Tron Sep 2012 #113
HiPointDem Sep 2012 #193
Kelvin Mace Sep 2012 #27
CitizenPatriot Sep 2012 #112
Kelvin Mace Sep 2012 #343
tavalon Sep 2012 #179
sabrina 1 Sep 2012 #74
tavalon Sep 2012 #182
Champion Jack Sep 2012 #250
Starboard Tack Sep 2012 #530
Zorra Sep 2012 #3
Booster Sep 2012 #8
Freddie Sep 2012 #190
Kelvin Mace Sep 2012 #344
Zorra Sep 2012 #420
russspeakeasy Sep 2012 #4
sadbear Sep 2012 #5
Kelvin Mace Sep 2012 #30
HiPointDem Sep 2012 #35
sadbear Sep 2012 #47
Kelvin Mace Sep 2012 #56
sadbear Sep 2012 #127
Kelvin Mace Sep 2012 #349
sadbear Sep 2012 #368
CreekDog Sep 2012 #301
tavalon Sep 2012 #183
sadbear Sep 2012 #263
tavalon Sep 2012 #394
sadbear Sep 2012 #399
CreekDog Sep 2012 #516
uponit7771 Sep 2012 #67
Kelvin Mace Sep 2012 #352
sabrina 1 Sep 2012 #85
sadbear Sep 2012 #129
sabrina 1 Sep 2012 #175
tavalon Sep 2012 #186
tavalon Sep 2012 #185
tavalon Sep 2012 #184
PowerToThePeople Sep 2012 #6
Kelvin Mace Sep 2012 #57
immoderate Sep 2012 #7
Kelvin Mace Sep 2012 #32
tavalon Sep 2012 #187
Stuart G Sep 2012 #9
JI7 Sep 2012 #18
Kelvin Mace Sep 2012 #33
otohara Sep 2012 #372
Kelvin Mace Sep 2012 #387
sabrina 1 Sep 2012 #80
Kelvin Mace Sep 2012 #123
tavalon Sep 2012 #189
sabrina 1 Sep 2012 #318
Marrah_G Sep 2012 #488
brush Sep 2012 #10
Kelvin Mace Sep 2012 #58
sabrina 1 Sep 2012 #321
brush Sep 2012 #330
sabrina 1 Sep 2012 #335
unapatriciated Oct 2012 #532
leftstreet Sep 2012 #11
Zorra Sep 2012 #21
leftstreet Sep 2012 #24
JI7 Sep 2012 #25
Kelvin Mace Sep 2012 #34
Tarheel_Dem Sep 2012 #163
tavalon Sep 2012 #195
KoKo Sep 2012 #408
tavalon Sep 2012 #194
tavalon Sep 2012 #192
leftstreet Sep 2012 #285
tavalon Sep 2012 #386
Whovian Sep 2012 #12
Kelvin Mace Sep 2012 #36
Whisp Sep 2012 #114
Kelvin Mace Sep 2012 #126
Whisp Sep 2012 #409
RetroLounge Sep 2012 #419
enlightenment Sep 2012 #362
sabrina 1 Sep 2012 #406
tavalon Sep 2012 #196
HiPointDem Sep 2012 #13
Kelvin Mace Sep 2012 #59
SaveAmerica Sep 2012 #121
treestar Sep 2012 #14
panzerfaust Sep 2012 #436
treestar Sep 2012 #440
Tarheel_Dem Sep 2012 #475
randome Sep 2012 #15
Kelvin Mace Sep 2012 #38
leftstreet Sep 2012 #41
Kelvin Mace Sep 2012 #60
randome Sep 2012 #48
Kelvin Mace Sep 2012 #130
randome Sep 2012 #231
sabrina 1 Sep 2012 #528
scheming daemons Sep 2012 #16
Kelvin Mace Sep 2012 #39
WiffenPoof Sep 2012 #404
Kelvin Mace Sep 2012 #442
AnotherMcIntosh Sep 2012 #49
Mz Pip Sep 2012 #20
jsmirman Sep 2012 #22
tavalon Sep 2012 #197
Fresh_Start Sep 2012 #23
Kelvin Mace Sep 2012 #78
tavalon Sep 2012 #198
nanabugg Sep 2012 #28
Kelvin Mace Sep 2012 #40
sabrina 1 Sep 2012 #90
MuseRider Sep 2012 #99
Thinkingabout Sep 2012 #29
Kelvin Mace Sep 2012 #54
CanonRay Sep 2012 #31
ibegurpard Sep 2012 #37
Kelvin Mace Sep 2012 #79
trof Sep 2012 #42
Kelvin Mace Sep 2012 #81
MariaM83 Sep 2012 #43
Kelvin Mace Sep 2012 #82
longship Sep 2012 #227
Pab Sungenis Sep 2012 #230
longship Sep 2012 #241
Pab Sungenis Sep 2012 #248
longship Sep 2012 #260
Pab Sungenis Sep 2012 #267
longship Sep 2012 #270
Kelvin Mace Sep 2012 #333
Kelvin Mace Sep 2012 #332
Kelvin Mace Sep 2012 #331
Panasonic Sep 2012 #45
Kelvin Mace Sep 2012 #83
Panasonic Sep 2012 #106
Kelvin Mace Sep 2012 #125
tavalon Sep 2012 #199
hootinholler Sep 2012 #256
mnhtnbb Sep 2012 #46
Kelvin Mace Sep 2012 #84
Egalitarian Thug Sep 2012 #50
renate Sep 2012 #53
Egalitarian Thug Sep 2012 #104
Spider Jerusalem Sep 2012 #51
randome Sep 2012 #52
Blue_Roses Sep 2012 #61
Tennessee Gal Sep 2012 #62
SunsetDreams Sep 2012 #87
RiffRandell Sep 2012 #392
Liberal_Stalwart71 Sep 2012 #95
Kelvin Mace Sep 2012 #327
Liberal_Stalwart71 Sep 2012 #396
bluestate10 Sep 2012 #152
Kelvin Mace Sep 2012 #325
tavalon Sep 2012 #200
Vinnie From Indy Sep 2012 #290
Kelvin Mace Sep 2012 #324
Union Scribe Sep 2012 #449
Kelvin Mace Sep 2012 #323
Spider Jerusalem Sep 2012 #374
Kelvin Mace Sep 2012 #375
sabrina 1 Sep 2012 #365
Spider Jerusalem Sep 2012 #377
sabrina 1 Sep 2012 #379
WiffenPoof Sep 2012 #403
louis c Sep 2012 #63
Pisces Sep 2012 #64
Kelvin Mace Sep 2012 #88
Major Nikon Sep 2012 #107
Kelvin Mace Sep 2012 #131
Major Nikon Sep 2012 #139
dionysus Sep 2012 #319
Walk away Sep 2012 #165
Union Scribe Sep 2012 #117
Kelvin Mace Sep 2012 #133
Major Nikon Sep 2012 #141
Kelvin Mace Sep 2012 #145
Major Nikon Sep 2012 #150
IndyJones Sep 2012 #168
Major Nikon Sep 2012 #174
tavalon Sep 2012 #202
Major Nikon Sep 2012 #210
tavalon Sep 2012 #226
Vinnie From Indy Sep 2012 #286
Union Scribe Sep 2012 #448
Major Nikon Sep 2012 #451
Pab Sungenis Sep 2012 #234
Major Nikon Sep 2012 #237
randome Sep 2012 #239
Pab Sungenis Sep 2012 #242
DainBramaged Sep 2012 #65
DisgustipatedinCA Sep 2012 #68
DainBramaged Sep 2012 #76
RetroLounge Sep 2012 #86
DainBramaged Sep 2012 #108
RetroLounge Sep 2012 #279
DainBramaged Sep 2012 #356
tavalon Sep 2012 #203
DainBramaged Sep 2012 #359
Kelvin Mace Sep 2012 #89
DainBramaged Sep 2012 #109
Kelvin Mace Sep 2012 #134
limpyhobbler Sep 2012 #101
tavalon Sep 2012 #204
Nye Bevan Sep 2012 #69
GreenPartyVoter Sep 2012 #73
Kelvin Mace Sep 2012 #91
limpyhobbler Sep 2012 #103
OnionPatch Sep 2012 #147
tavalon Sep 2012 #205
MineralMan Sep 2012 #71
Kelvin Mace Sep 2012 #92
tavalon Sep 2012 #206
GreenPartyVoter Sep 2012 #72
Kelvin Mace Sep 2012 #93
tavalon Sep 2012 #207
unapatriciated Oct 2012 #533
smokey nj Sep 2012 #229
Liberal_Stalwart71 Sep 2012 #94
Rosa Luxemburg Sep 2012 #96
Kelvin Mace Sep 2012 #135
Liberal_Stalwart71 Sep 2012 #97
stlsaxman Sep 2012 #98
Cleita Sep 2012 #100
mshasta Sep 2012 #102
cr8tvlde Sep 2012 #105
Pab Sungenis Sep 2012 #238
WinkyDink Sep 2012 #110
DainBramaged Sep 2012 #111
99Forever Sep 2012 #120
Kelvin Mace Sep 2012 #146
bluestate10 Sep 2012 #153
Kelvin Mace Sep 2012 #308
DainBramaged Sep 2012 #363
Major Nikon Sep 2012 #155
Union Scribe Sep 2012 #162
Major Nikon Sep 2012 #173
Pab Sungenis Sep 2012 #240
randome Sep 2012 #244
Pab Sungenis Sep 2012 #247
Kelvin Mace Sep 2012 #309
randome Sep 2012 #314
Major Nikon Sep 2012 #245
Pab Sungenis Sep 2012 #258
tavalon Sep 2012 #209
Major Nikon Sep 2012 #220
tavalon Sep 2012 #225
Major Nikon Sep 2012 #233
tavalon Sep 2012 #395
WinkyDink Sep 2012 #232
stevenleser Sep 2012 #249
Kelvin Mace Sep 2012 #315
Kelvin Mace Sep 2012 #271
sabrina 1 Sep 2012 #322
Union Scribe Sep 2012 #119
Kelvin Mace Sep 2012 #143
ohheckyeah Sep 2012 #158
Kelvin Mace Sep 2012 #306
ohheckyeah Sep 2012 #320
WinkyDink Sep 2012 #235
Kelvin Mace Sep 2012 #312
RandiFan1290 Sep 2012 #201
tavalon Sep 2012 #208
WinkyDink Sep 2012 #236
99Forever Sep 2012 #115
Kelvin Mace Sep 2012 #144
akbacchus_BC Sep 2012 #116
tavalon Sep 2012 #211
Kelvin Mace Sep 2012 #311
SaveAmerica Sep 2012 #118
Kelvin Mace Sep 2012 #140
SaveAmerica Sep 2012 #400
tavalon Sep 2012 #212
SaveAmerica Sep 2012 #398
DonCoquixote Sep 2012 #122
stevenleser Sep 2012 #128
Kelvin Mace Sep 2012 #138
aikoaiko Sep 2012 #132
Kelvin Mace Sep 2012 #136
Politicub Sep 2012 #137
Kelvin Mace Sep 2012 #142
Politicub Sep 2012 #149
tavalon Sep 2012 #215
Pab Sungenis Sep 2012 #246
Politicub Sep 2012 #253
Kelvin Mace Sep 2012 #293
stevenleser Sep 2012 #254
Pab Sungenis Sep 2012 #259
Kelvin Mace Sep 2012 #294
sabrina 1 Sep 2012 #423
randome Sep 2012 #255
Pab Sungenis Sep 2012 #257
randome Sep 2012 #262
Pab Sungenis Sep 2012 #266
randome Sep 2012 #269
Kelvin Mace Sep 2012 #292
Kelvin Mace Sep 2012 #289
tavalon Sep 2012 #213
Post removed Sep 2012 #148
SIDURI Sep 2012 #164
sabrina 1 Sep 2012 #424
SIDURI Sep 2012 #445
sabrina 1 Sep 2012 #471
tavalon Sep 2012 #216
grantcart Sep 2012 #313
tavalon Sep 2012 #381
Kelvin Mace Sep 2012 #300
grantcart Sep 2012 #310
blaze Sep 2012 #411
brush Sep 2012 #402
bluestate10 Sep 2012 #151
tavalon Sep 2012 #217
Kelvin Mace Sep 2012 #305
KoKo Sep 2012 #366
Kelvin Mace Sep 2012 #384
tavalon Sep 2012 #382
KoKo Sep 2012 #407
tavalon Sep 2012 #410
KoKo Sep 2012 #413
tavalon Sep 2012 #432
Kelvin Mace Sep 2012 #302
WI_DEM Sep 2012 #154
tavalon Sep 2012 #218
MFM008 Sep 2012 #156
johnlucas Sep 2012 #157
tavalon Sep 2012 #219
stevenleser Sep 2012 #252
johnlucas Sep 2012 #336
stevenleser Sep 2012 #339
johnlucas Sep 2012 #357
unapatriciated Oct 2012 #534
johnlucas Oct 2012 #536
mmonk Sep 2012 #159
donheld Sep 2012 #160
Tarheel_Dem Sep 2012 #169
tavalon Sep 2012 #221
sadbear Sep 2012 #265
tavalon Sep 2012 #391
sadbear Sep 2012 #401
tavalon Sep 2012 #405
sabrina 1 Sep 2012 #425
joshcryer Sep 2012 #428
lovemydog Sep 2012 #166
Walk away Sep 2012 #167
sabrina 1 Sep 2012 #177
Walk away Sep 2012 #251
Kelvin Mace Sep 2012 #287
Walk away Sep 2012 #341
sabrina 1 Sep 2012 #326
Walk away Sep 2012 #345
sabrina 1 Sep 2012 #350
tavalon Sep 2012 #222
Kelvin Mace Sep 2012 #284
tavalon Sep 2012 #176
sabrina 1 Sep 2012 #181
Kelvin Mace Sep 2012 #281
tama Sep 2012 #329
Kelvin Mace Sep 2012 #393
NNN0LHI Sep 2012 #180
Kelvin Mace Sep 2012 #282
cali Sep 2012 #188
HiPointDem Sep 2012 #191
cali Sep 2012 #214
HiPointDem Sep 2012 #224
Kelvin Mace Sep 2012 #280
tavalon Sep 2012 #223
Kelvin Mace Sep 2012 #277
tavalon Sep 2012 #390
Kelvin Mace Sep 2012 #278
Laurajr Sep 2012 #228
Kelvin Mace Sep 2012 #274
WinkyDink Sep 2012 #243
gateley Sep 2012 #261
Kelvin Mace Sep 2012 #273
gateley Sep 2012 #307
SidDithers Sep 2012 #264
Kelvin Mace Sep 2012 #272
RevStPatrick Sep 2012 #268
twins.fan Sep 2012 #275
eomer Sep 2012 #276
Kelvin Mace Sep 2012 #295
Vinnie From Indy Sep 2012 #283
DrewFlorida Sep 2012 #288
Kelvin Mace Sep 2012 #297
Pab Sungenis Sep 2012 #463
upi402 Sep 2012 #291
CreekDog Sep 2012 #296
Kelvin Mace Sep 2012 #298
CreekDog Sep 2012 #303
Kelvin Mace Sep 2012 #337
sabrina 1 Sep 2012 #426
Kelvin Mace Sep 2012 #524
CreekDog Sep 2012 #521
Kelvin Mace Sep 2012 #523
CreekDog Sep 2012 #518
Kelvin Mace Sep 2012 #526
TBF Sep 2012 #316
limpyhobbler Sep 2012 #441
TBF Sep 2012 #453
Pab Sungenis Sep 2012 #461
TBF Sep 2012 #494
MineralMan Sep 2012 #317
Kelvin Mace Sep 2012 #338
MineralMan Sep 2012 #434
Kelvin Mace Sep 2012 #444
MineralMan Sep 2012 #454
Kelvin Mace Sep 2012 #456
sabrina 1 Sep 2012 #415
mvd Sep 2012 #328
brush Sep 2012 #334
Kelvin Mace Sep 2012 #340
DainBramaged Sep 2012 #361
Kelvin Mace Sep 2012 #385
DainBramaged Sep 2012 #389
RetroLounge Sep 2012 #421
randome Sep 2012 #351
Kelvin Mace Sep 2012 #353
randome Sep 2012 #355
Surya Gayatri Sep 2012 #354
Kelvin Mace Sep 2012 #360
Jake2413 Sep 2012 #358
mt1000 Sep 2012 #364
cr8tvlde Sep 2012 #367
robinlynne Sep 2012 #369
rucky Sep 2012 #370
DeSwiss Sep 2012 #371
Whisp Sep 2012 #380
brush Sep 2012 #397
outsideworld Sep 2012 #412
Alduin Sep 2012 #414
sabrina 1 Sep 2012 #416
trumad Sep 2012 #433
Rowdyboy Sep 2012 #417
sabrina 1 Sep 2012 #427
Rowdyboy Sep 2012 #437
JI7 Sep 2012 #418
RetroLounge Sep 2012 #422
Union Scribe Sep 2012 #447
Autumn Sep 2012 #531
joshcryer Sep 2012 #429
Kolesar Sep 2012 #430
RBInMaine Sep 2012 #431
Pab Sungenis Sep 2012 #460
Jennicut Sep 2012 #435
Pab Sungenis Sep 2012 #459
Jennicut Sep 2012 #466
Kelvin Mace Sep 2012 #474
Kelvin Mace Sep 2012 #477
ElboRuum Sep 2012 #438
Whisp Sep 2012 #439
Kelvin Mace Sep 2012 #472
Bobbie Jo Sep 2012 #443
Kelvin Mace Sep 2012 #469
Bobbie Jo Sep 2012 #476
Kelvin Mace Sep 2012 #480
Union Scribe Sep 2012 #446
JI7 Sep 2012 #450
Kelvin Mace Sep 2012 #467
Kelvin Mace Sep 2012 #457
ElboRuum Sep 2012 #520
MineralMan Sep 2012 #455
Kelvin Mace Sep 2012 #468
sadbear Sep 2012 #470
Kelvin Mace Sep 2012 #479
MineralMan Sep 2012 #486
Kelvin Mace Sep 2012 #489
MineralMan Sep 2012 #490
Kelvin Mace Sep 2012 #493
Pab Sungenis Sep 2012 #458
Kelvin Mace Sep 2012 #465
ElboRuum Sep 2012 #512
Kelvin Mace Sep 2012 #464
ElboRuum Sep 2012 #508
Tarheel_Dem Sep 2012 #511
unapatriciated Oct 2012 #535
ElboRuum Oct 2012 #537
Tarheel_Dem Sep 2012 #509
Marrah_G Sep 2012 #462
Kelvin Mace Sep 2012 #473
WinkyDink Sep 2012 #482
Kelvin Mace Sep 2012 #485
peace13 Sep 2012 #478
Kelvin Mace Sep 2012 #484
hello larry Sep 2012 #481
Kelvin Mace Sep 2012 #498
Green_Lantern Sep 2012 #483
Marrah_G Sep 2012 #487
Green_Lantern Sep 2012 #492
Kelvin Mace Sep 2012 #497
Kelvin Mace Sep 2012 #496
Blue_Tires Sep 2012 #491
Kelvin Mace Sep 2012 #495
Blue_Tires Sep 2012 #499
Kelvin Mace Sep 2012 #500
darkangel218 Sep 2012 #501
Kelvin Mace Sep 2012 #504
girl gone mad Sep 2012 #502
msanthrope Sep 2012 #505
DonCoquixote Sep 2012 #503
Kelvin Mace Sep 2012 #506
DonCoquixote Sep 2012 #514
Kelvin Mace Sep 2012 #515
DonCoquixote Sep 2012 #527
Kelvin Mace Sep 2012 #529
heaven05 Sep 2012 #507
Kelvin Mace Sep 2012 #522
Thrill Sep 2012 #510
Kelvin Mace Sep 2012 #517
Thrill Sep 2012 #519
Kelvin Mace Sep 2012 #525
quinnox Sep 2012 #513

Response to Kelvin Mace (Original post)

Fri Sep 21, 2012, 05:48 PM

1. Can you be more specific about what's ticking you off?

 

Much of what President Obama hasn't done was due to an unprecedented, contrarian congress.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Cooley Hurd (Reply #1)

Fri Sep 21, 2012, 06:18 PM

26. I have discussed this at length

 

and have the scars to prove it.

A short list can be found here:

http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1124&pid=3447

None of these issues listed involve congress and entirely within the President's jurisdiction.



Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Kelvin Mace (Reply #26)

Fri Sep 21, 2012, 06:58 PM

44. Thanks Kelvin. I agree with you regarding the list...

 

...but the conclusion I've reached (regarding the items in your list) is that he can only do what the MIC will let him do. I think the lessons learned from what the MIC and the CIA ultimately did to President Kennedy aren't lost on President Obama.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Cooley Hurd (Reply #44)

Fri Sep 21, 2012, 08:06 PM

55. I would think the CIA

 

would be extremely happy for the truth of the Bush years to come out, as recent revelations have shown them as being made the "fall guys" by Bush.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Kelvin Mace (Reply #55)

Sat Sep 22, 2012, 12:47 PM

299. My take: A vote for Obama is a huge vote against Citizens United. That's enough for me.

 

All that money spent in a losing effort would speak volumes and probably save the Republic as Ben Franklin knew it.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to nanabugg (Reply #299)

Sat Sep 22, 2012, 03:29 PM

342. Barring a Constitutional amendment

 

Citizen's United is the law of the land.

That ship has sailed and cannot be undone, any more than Bush v. Gore can be undone.

A Constitutional amendment will come from the Congress, not the White House.

No matter who Obama might appoint to the SCOTUS (if he is allowed to appoint someone), it will be a 5-4 right-wing court.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Kelvin Mace (Original post)

Fri Sep 21, 2012, 05:52 PM

2. misguided anger...a President can't do shit without cooperation from congress

[IMG][/IMG]

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to spanone (Reply #2)

Fri Sep 21, 2012, 06:05 PM

17. so if presidents 'can't do shit', why the focus on presidential elections?

 

seems like bush did a lot of shit despite a democratic majority part of the way.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to HiPointDem (Reply #17)

Fri Sep 21, 2012, 06:07 PM

19. money. Celebrities sell the party brand n/t

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to HiPointDem (Reply #17)

Fri Sep 21, 2012, 08:30 PM

66. It's best if you learn how the US Government works and get taught recent history but you're

...spouting GOP and FUD memes here whether you know it or not.

1. Obama isn't a dicatator and in no time in US history has the oposition party made the president the NUMBER ONE focus during a national crisis

2. It's well know the GOP changed senate rules defacto...

Regards

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to uponit7771 (Reply #66)

Fri Sep 21, 2012, 08:33 PM

70. that tone is sure to draw many disaffected to your cause

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to HiPointDem (Reply #70)

Fri Sep 21, 2012, 09:07 PM

77. Supreme Court nominations.

That ought to be a huge reason to vote in a Presidential election. I don't think even Ralph Nader thinks there's no difference between Democratic and Republican nominees to the bench. Or would you like to have a couple more Roberts clones as Supremes? Tone doesn't matter jack shit when you're looking at a monumental disaster like that, does it?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to HiPointDem (Reply #70)

Sat Sep 22, 2012, 03:58 AM

161. From your posting history, I'm not sure you ever had "a cause", at least not one that....

conforms to the mission of this board. You know the one I mean...."Electing Democrats"?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Tarheel_Dem (Reply #161)

Sat Sep 22, 2012, 04:49 AM

170. i'm a life-long democrat who has never voted republican. i post here to discuss policy issues that

 

concern me. our president told us to hold his feet to the fire, & i took him at his word.

you got a problem with me, take it to management or alert on my posts.

Here's the mission statement of DU; i think you must have forgotten the majority of it.

Mission Statement

Democratic Underground is an online community where politically liberal people can do their part to effect political and social change by:

Interacting with friendly, like-minded people;
Sharing news and information, free from the corporate media filter;
Participating in lively, thought-provoking discussions;
Helping elect more Democrats to political office at all levels of American government; and
Having fun!

After more than a decade online, Democratic Underground still hosts the most active liberal discussion board on the Internet. We are an independent website funded by member subscriptions and advertising, and we have no affiliation with the Democratic Party. Democratic Underground is a truly grassroots community where regular members drive the discussion and set the standards. There is no other website quite like it anywhere on the Internet.

We are always looking for friendly, liberal people who appreciate good discussions and who understand the importance of electing more Democrats to office. So sign up today!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to HiPointDem (Reply #170)

Sat Sep 22, 2012, 04:54 AM

171. Yeah, and this is the part you forgot.

who understand the importance of electing more Democrats to office


Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Tarheel_Dem (Reply #171)

Sat Sep 22, 2012, 05:01 AM

172. i posted the entire statement. i forgot nothing. as i said, if you have a problem with me or my

 

posts, take it to management or alert, but leave me alone. i don't respond well to bullying.

continue in the same vein if you like but i won't be reading or responding.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Tarheel_Dem (Reply #171)

Mon Sep 24, 2012, 05:06 AM

452. There is electing Democrats period, and there is electing Democrats comma

For a lot of us, after the comma comes "because you usually get better public policy from Democrats." And when we don't, we do not intend to just let it go at that.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Tarheel_Dem (Reply #161)

Sat Sep 22, 2012, 06:01 AM

178. You don't know this person, clearly.

He has been a stalwart activist against election fraud. Obama led all of us to believe he would do much more in a much more transparent way than he has.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Tarheel_Dem (Reply #161)

Sat Sep 22, 2012, 03:36 PM

346. Democrat is used as synonymous with "liberal"

 

which it is not.

I fought against "Democrat" Lieberman back in the day, and will fight against anyone like him.

A "D" after your name does not automatically command loyalty. What is the difference between a Dem that constantly sides against us and a Conservative that always sides against us?

Hey, Lieberman was with us on everything except the war. And abortion. And Social Security. And Medicare. And....

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Kelvin Mace (Reply #346)

Sat Sep 22, 2012, 03:41 PM

348. Tell it to Jill Stein over at Green Underground. Oh wait......

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to uponit7771 (Reply #66)

Sat Sep 22, 2012, 12:39 AM

124. I greatly resent being accused of "spouting" any GOP "meme"

 

1) Given that Obama is currently fighting for indefinite detention without trial and has already asserted that he can murder anyone, even a U.S. citizen, by simply declaring them a "terrorist", I believe that is pretty much the definition of a dictator. These are the facts, sorry they don't bother you, but they do bother me.

2) How could the GOP "change" the senate rules when the Dems were in the majority. The rules changed because the Dem MAJORITY allowed them to be changed.

3) My objection to Obama is to the abuse of his executive power, not his fights with the Congress.

4) I am old enough to remember when Bush acted this way and people were outraged. Suddenly, since there is a "D" beside his name it ain't no thing?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Kelvin Mace (Reply #124)

Sat Sep 22, 2012, 12:58 PM

304. It's sad that some self-described Liberals suffer self-defeatism.

Not voting gives your vote to the GOP. That's just the reality. Even RepubLemmings know that glaring truth, that's why they'll vote for Romney even if they can't stand him or his ideas for government. They're not voting for Romney. They're voting against President Obama. Maybe you can silence your conscience and tell yourself that same truth and vote anyway.

You will never get 100% of what you want from anyone. In fact, if you wait for that Liberal Messiah, you might as well withdraw from ever voting because no one will be up to your impossible standards. That's just the painful truth - something I had learned the hard way.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to BlueCaliDem (Reply #304)

Sat Sep 22, 2012, 03:40 PM

347. Face palm!

 

Not voting gives your vote to the GOP. That's just the reality


Where do I say I am not voting? The very point of the post is I AM VOTING, and trying to provide an ethical reason others who feel as I do can vote.

I do not ask 100% of anyone, just that they not cross some pretty damned bright lines, you know, murder, torture, domestic spying, massive civil rights violations, shit like that.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Kelvin Mace (Reply #347)

Sat Sep 22, 2012, 06:08 PM

373. Well,

it is just my impression that the very point of your post is probably not "I AM VOTING."

I could be wrong.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to blue neen (Reply #373)

Sat Sep 22, 2012, 06:25 PM

376. How many different way can I say

 

YES I AM VOTING?

Do you need a sworn statement?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Kelvin Mace (Reply #376)

Sat Sep 22, 2012, 06:33 PM

378. Sworn statement? Strange, since I didn't say that you aren't voting.

Hey, if it would make you happy, go ahead.

It won't stop people from thinking, "Things that make you go hmmm", though.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to blue neen (Reply #378)

Sat Sep 22, 2012, 07:21 PM

383. My profound apologies

 

I misread your post.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Kelvin Mace (Reply #383)

Sat Sep 22, 2012, 07:30 PM

388. No problem!

I'm sure you can now understand how people can misread your posts, too!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to HiPointDem (Reply #17)

Fri Sep 21, 2012, 09:05 PM

75. re: Bush

He did a lot of shit because for 6 years, he HAD a Republican Congress. And during a lot of his regime, all the Democrats either rolled over or bent over, depending on what he was demanding.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to HiPointDem (Reply #17)

Fri Sep 21, 2012, 11:07 PM

113. Bush got a bunch of tax cuts and wars

War-making powers are more or less turned over to the executive, even though they were intended to be held by the congress. Tax cuts can be passed through reconciliation, which only requires 51 votes in the Senate.

The signature piece of Bush's domestic agenda was the privatization of social security. He didn't get it.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Hippo_Tron (Reply #113)

Sat Sep 22, 2012, 06:29 AM

193. bush got no child left behind with increased spending to close schools, not to mention an entirely

 

new department of homeland security, seig heil.

plus he turned travel into a fucking nightmare with no shampoo.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to spanone (Reply #2)

Fri Sep 21, 2012, 06:21 PM

27. My objections

 

involve issues totally with his jurisdiction and don't involve Congress.

See above, if you wish a list.

I know why I am angry, please do not tell me my anger is misguided.

I am attempting to provide a solution for myself and folks like me, not get back into this fight.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Kelvin Mace (Reply #27)

Fri Sep 21, 2012, 11:00 PM

112. I respect your compromise here a lot

I don't agree with everything on your list, but that's not the issue. It made me very happy to think of you voting via proxy for those who will be denied. That's really a wonderful idea.

Carry on!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to CitizenPatriot (Reply #112)

Sat Sep 22, 2012, 03:30 PM

343. Thank you for understanding

 

and taking my post in the spirit intended.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Kelvin Mace (Reply #27)

Sat Sep 22, 2012, 06:05 AM

179. You're not misguided

But the wagons have circled. It's too late in this term to call him out on these things. 24/7, I will be at the barricades with you after he's back in for the next four years. I'm glad you found a way to circumvent the despair. I'm not surprised that you found it withing voter suppression.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to spanone (Reply #2)

Fri Sep 21, 2012, 09:03 PM

74. Then let's stop spending all this money and time on the Presidential election and start focusing on

Congress.

Looking at DU recently, if what you say is true, why are there so few posts on all the Progressive Dems who are running for Congress?

It may well be true that the POTUS no longer has any power. That s/he is merely a figurehead for the Global Corps and the MIC, even if they don't want to be.

Can you explain why there is so much emphasis on this 'powerless' office and so little on where the real power of the people could be?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to sabrina 1 (Reply #74)

Sat Sep 22, 2012, 06:11 AM

182. Explain it to me

I've been sounding that cry for a number of weeks now. The Presidential race is over. Over. We already know that Obama has it locked, even with rampant election fraud. It's time to think about his coattails and get Congress back. And then, we need to hold all of their feet to the fire.

Obama and the Democrats will get my vote. But the day after the election and years into the future they will serve us or they will wish they had. I am done with the bullshit in Washington DC. Done. Stick a fork in it.

The rage that is being directed at RMoney, his aristocratic shrew wife, and Lyin Ryan, will still be out here after the election. We still Occupy. And they will learn how to be good civil servants. It's way past time they did.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to spanone (Reply #2)

Sat Sep 22, 2012, 09:12 AM

250. Exactly

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to spanone (Reply #2)

Tue Sep 25, 2012, 01:24 PM

530. Actually, reality is the converse.

A president can do lots of shit with or without Congress. He can't do much good without support from Congress. That's the downside of a non-parliamentary system.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Kelvin Mace (Original post)

Fri Sep 21, 2012, 05:53 PM

3. Thanks, Kelvin. You could also consider it a vote to try to help me gain equal rights.

That's a very real, and critically important, thing for me, and for the rest of the LGBT community also.

Also, please consider it a vote for the maintenance and furthering of women's rights as well.

Etc.

I understand your issues with the President, and I have more than a few issues myself. But the overall benefits of a President Obama, rather than a President Romney, are enormous.

Rest assured, I will continue to adamantly advocate for the President to always do the right thing after he is safely back in the WH where we need hm to be for his 2nd term.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Zorra (Reply #3)

Fri Sep 21, 2012, 05:55 PM

8. Yeah, what you said. Rmoney would be a disaster.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Zorra (Reply #3)

Sat Sep 22, 2012, 06:24 AM

190. Yes and women too

How anyone could stay home and let the party of "legitimate rape" and flat-out misogyny take office...in the words of John Lennon, how do you sleep?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Zorra (Reply #3)

Sat Sep 22, 2012, 03:32 PM

344. I will indeed

 

Thanks for actually reading my post.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Kelvin Mace (Reply #344)

Sun Sep 23, 2012, 01:48 AM

420. lol ~

Maybe DU should offer a few free complimentary courses?



Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Kelvin Mace (Original post)

Fri Sep 21, 2012, 05:54 PM

4. Put that bottle down. Right now !!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Kelvin Mace (Original post)

Fri Sep 21, 2012, 05:54 PM

5. Remember, we don't elect Kings.

Has it completely escaped you what the opposition party has been doing the entire time? And they've actually made no secret of their priorities either. Why haven't you picked up on this?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to sadbear (Reply #5)

Fri Sep 21, 2012, 06:25 PM

30. Once again,

 

my objections are based on issues totally within Obama's power to act upon. I am not blaming him for laws he cannot get through Congress. However, prosecuting war crimes, torture and Wall Street fraud do NOT require congressional approval (to name a few items).

Also, I am trying NOT to argue the issue again.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Kelvin Mace (Reply #30)

Fri Sep 21, 2012, 06:36 PM

35. he sets his own ed policy too. and pubs are happy to vote the money to destroy public education.

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Kelvin Mace (Reply #30)

Fri Sep 21, 2012, 07:07 PM

47. But you're basis is without merit.

President Obama has amazingly accomplished quite a lot when you factor in the republican obstructionism he's had to deal with since day 1, mainly because Congressional republicans gave their approval. I am under no illusion that they would not have let anything slip through if President Obama hadn't made any concessions of his own. If President Obama had gone after the things we all wanted him to go after, he would have accomplished nothing because Congressional republicans would have blocked EVERYTHING.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to sadbear (Reply #47)

Fri Sep 21, 2012, 08:09 PM

56. I keep trying to avoid arguing this issue

 

and people keep insisting I do.

I have provided a link for those people who demand I explain myself.

My reasons have nothing to do with Congress, and everything to do with issues totally under his control.

Congress is NOT forcing Obama to argue for the power to detain people without charge forever. He is doing that himself.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Kelvin Mace (Reply #56)

Sat Sep 22, 2012, 12:44 AM

127. President Obama doesn't govern is a vacuum.

And you think republicans will scratch is back even if he doesn't scratch theirs'? They may not be arguing anything, but President Obama is smart enough to read between the lines. This purist bullshit is a big reason why we got blown out of the fucking water in 2010.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to sadbear (Reply #127)

Sat Sep 22, 2012, 03:42 PM

349. On issues directly under executive authority

 

he sure as hell does.

No one is forcing him to fight for unlawful detention.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Kelvin Mace (Reply #349)

Sat Sep 22, 2012, 05:37 PM

368. You don't think so?

I do.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Kelvin Mace (Reply #56)


Response to sadbear (Reply #47)

Sat Sep 22, 2012, 06:15 AM

183. Reading comprehension is hard, huh?

Look, I get that the wagons have circled and nothing bad is to be said.

However, after the election, the Third Way Democrats must be taught that there isn't a third way in America, it's just a way to Republicanize the Democrats. And we won't have it anymore. No more Rahm Emanuels, no more DINOs. Done.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to tavalon (Reply #183)

Sat Sep 22, 2012, 10:16 AM

263. Short memory, huh?

That's what happened in 2010. You want that again? Sorry, but the only way to move to the left is to elect fewer republicans and more democrats.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to sadbear (Reply #263)

Sat Sep 22, 2012, 07:35 PM

394. And that, in an elegant nutshell, is what the OP did

He wasn't going to be able to vote for Obama without too large a hit to his soul. But he is a voting rights champion, so taking the focus off of the lesser evil and onto the disenfranchised voter, he is now able to vote for Obama. Reading comprehension would have shown that to you.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to tavalon (Reply #394)

Sat Sep 22, 2012, 09:18 PM

399. Why do you insist on being insulting to everyone, even fellow DU'ers?

Yes, we are all mostly liberals and progressives. I get that. But this is Democratic Underground, not Progressive Underground. If it hits your soul to support a Democrat, perhaps you're in the wrong place.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to tavalon (Reply #183)

Mon Sep 24, 2012, 08:03 PM

516. I was wrong and self deleted, I'm sorry

I see now what the OP is trying to do and appreciate it.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Kelvin Mace (Reply #30)

Fri Sep 21, 2012, 08:32 PM

67. They require congressional cooperation and YOU KNOW THAT

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to uponit7771 (Reply #67)

Sat Sep 22, 2012, 03:44 PM

352. Obama kept fighting for DOMA

 

then he stopped.

That did not require Congressional cooperation.

All I am asking is for him to STOP fighting for indefinite detention without trial.

It is just as easy as it was picking up the phone and telling Justice to STOP defending DOMA.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to sadbear (Reply #5)

Fri Sep 21, 2012, 09:25 PM

85. Republicans did not choose his cabinet, he did. I hope this time he can find some

Progressives to put in his cabinet. They are not hard to find, yet, he chose people like the anti-Education, anti-Progressive, Rahm Emanuel, and a former member of Monsanto, not to mention his economic team.

We DO have brilliant Progressives in this country and a Democratic President should have been able to find a few of them to appoint to his Cabinet.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to sabrina 1 (Reply #85)

Sat Sep 22, 2012, 12:47 AM

129. President Obama did run on a somewhat "post-partisan" platform.

Do you not remember that? Healing the divide, and whatnot? One of the reasons he was elected. And now we're slamming him for it? This is the president we elected and we're delusional to think he's going to change now.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to sadbear (Reply #129)

Sat Sep 22, 2012, 05:54 AM

175. He did NOT run on indefinite detention. He did not run on protecting War Criminals

or holding innocent people, such as the detainee in Gitmo who tragically died last week, for years even after they were declared innocent of any crimes.

He did NOT run on Bush's policies, yet he has continued and in some cases even expanded them. He did not run on Bush's Education program, and if we had known who he would have chosen for his education Secretary, I for one would not have been as enthusiastic as I was.

But who would have thought that Democrats, once they got the power, would continue some of Bush's worst policies, and worse, refuse to prosecute war criminals, making it necessary now for other countries to do it for us.

We are NOT blind, please do not insult the intelligence of Democrats here, save that for the willfully blind on the Right who will defend anyone with an R after their name.

Refusing to see the problems, giving blind allegiance to any party, is what will, and has, caused the deterioration of this country.

I paid close attention to what this president said during the campaign. This latest ploy you are using 'oh, but you must not have been paying attention', will be the exact same ploy used after THIS election, if this President does not begin to bring about the changes he promised, especially in the area of Civil Liberties and people again point it out.

Because making excuses for politicians appears to be more important to some people than doing what is right and letting them KNOW we will not tolerate any more shifting to the right.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to sabrina 1 (Reply #175)

Sat Sep 22, 2012, 06:20 AM

186. I'm with you all the way!

I've removed the blow torch from the Democrats feet for now. Come January, let's hope to see a sea change. If not, my blow torch comes back full force. He said he wanted me to hold his feet to the fire.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to sadbear (Reply #129)

Sat Sep 22, 2012, 06:18 AM

185. He's actually going to have to

I hope that, without the next election cycle on his plate, he will do it of his own volition.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to sabrina 1 (Reply #85)

Sat Sep 22, 2012, 06:16 AM

184. Yep, if that slimy skunk or any of his ilk are involved in Obama's second term

I'm going to have really, really big problems with that.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Kelvin Mace (Original post)

Fri Sep 21, 2012, 05:55 PM

6. I am glad to see you will cast Obama

 

I understand that there is no true progressives to vote for. And if there were, they currently could not take out any establishment candidates.

As I have said before, we will be more likely see systemic changes that would allow this under Democratic leadership than Republican.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to PowerToThePeople (Reply #6)

Fri Sep 21, 2012, 08:10 PM

57. I'm not so sure

 

but I am trying to be optimistic.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Kelvin Mace (Original post)

Fri Sep 21, 2012, 05:55 PM

7. I will vote for him, despite extreme misgivings...

 

Not the least of which is the dismantling of public education. I used to be a teacher. And this is only part of the favoritism he shows for corporations. So it extends to anti-environmentalism. I've got lots to complain about.

Romney will be worse. A lot worse. He'll dismantle the economy, destroy human rights, start wars, and appoint shit-stains to the Supreme Court. Since Nixon, I have said the Republicans can't get any worse, and they always do.

Romney takes it to a new level. His promised incompetence should raise an alarm that will be hard to ignore. The man is dysfunctional.

--imm

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to immoderate (Reply #7)

Fri Sep 21, 2012, 06:28 PM

32. I completely understand the pragamatic

 

arguments of the issue. But to me, the lesser of two evils is still evil.

However, I am offering a solution to the not insignificant number of people like myself who could not vote for Obama as a "lesser of evils" given the seriousness of his failings. This is the only way I can vote for him and look myself in the mirror.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Kelvin Mace (Reply #32)

Sat Sep 22, 2012, 06:22 AM

187. Yeah, had I not already done the mental gymnastics to be okay with this,

I would have jumped on this. So, thank you. I hope you've helped some of our other brethren who didn't sell their soul to pragmatism.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Kelvin Mace (Original post)

Fri Sep 21, 2012, 05:57 PM

9. You got to read paragraph8, or is it 9?, so the guy will vote for Obama anyway..ok??

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Stuart G (Reply #9)

Fri Sep 21, 2012, 06:06 PM

18. probably better if he just dind't vote than to spread this negative crap

and then at the end say "but i will vote for him" for those who take issue with what he said.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to JI7 (Reply #18)

Fri Sep 21, 2012, 06:31 PM

33. Really?

 

Is that what you want? I am trying to help here, as I am NOT the only person with problems with Obama.

Do you want the votes or don't you? I am making a sincere effort to deal with a very troubling issue and you are dismissing it out of hand.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Kelvin Mace (Reply #33)

Sat Sep 22, 2012, 05:54 PM

372. Who Needs Voter Disenfranchising

 

When there's so many in the Obama hasn't done shit crowd?

Who suffers when Dems don't vote?
Do you remember 2010?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to otohara (Reply #372)

Sat Sep 22, 2012, 07:29 PM

387. Yeah, I do!

 

Voted in that election too. Of course if Obama hadn't sold out the liberal wing of the party he wouldn't have depressed the vote so badly. People react badly to bad faith.

Also, my gripe isn't just "Obama ain't done shit", it is the things he has done, like expand Bush policies and legalize them.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to JI7 (Reply #18)

Fri Sep 21, 2012, 09:18 PM

80. Why? Why are people on a Democratic board advocating that people just 'stfu and vote'?

Elections are about ISSUES, they are about the the PEOPLE. We do NOT live in a dictatorship.

I agree with the OP. It's a matter of conscience for a lot of people whether they can, in good conscience, vote for anyone who supports indefinite detention, who protects War Criminals from prosecution thus denying their victims any justice. If we were looking at this from outside this country, we would be outraged. Women who were raped, children sodomized, innocent people brutally tortured, some of them, to death. And still no justice for them, but worse, protection.

If your conscience doesn't trouble you at all, then that is your business, but to deny that those who did not lose their conscience once the letter after the name of the President changed, is refusing to face a fact. That this election presents a huge problem for them.

Telling them to shut up and ignore the suffering of other human beings is definitely not helping.

The OP has found a way to assuage his conscience and imo, it is convincing enough for me, who shares his concerns about torture and murder and extraordinary renditions and extra-judicial killings and indefinite detentions, to see a way to stop the Republicans by casting a vote for a President who has continued the horrific policies we were ALL so outraged over during the Bush years. To use the right to vote for those whose right is being taken away from them.

His solution is likely to get votes for this President as people of conscience need a way to be able to feel their vote for someone whose policies on all of the above stated issues, are extremely disturbing to say the least.

I do not wish to go down in history as the German people have, with future generations asking 'but why didn't the American people DO something, why did they not speak out'?

A detainee at Guantanamo Bay died last week. You should read his story which will go into the history books, and then tell us how any decent human being could not be outraged at what this country is doing to other, innocent human beings. And at the fact that not a single War Criminal has been prosecuted.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to sabrina 1 (Reply #80)

Sat Sep 22, 2012, 12:33 AM

123. Thank you for your eloquenrt summation

 

of my dilemma.

It baffles me that some people get angry when you give them what they ask for, because you don't choose to do it for THEIR reasons.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to sabrina 1 (Reply #80)

Sat Sep 22, 2012, 06:23 AM

189. I couldn't agree more

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to JI7 (Reply #18)

Sat Sep 22, 2012, 02:10 PM

318. Giving people a reason TO vote is 'negative crap'??

No, negative crap is telling people the only reason they should vote for this President is because the other guy is so bad you don't have a choice.

What the OP does is give people who in good conscience are finding it difficult to vote at all, a very good reason to vote for Obama. Fortunately people on the left are still capable of reading and understanding what the OP's point is. And I will say this, IF I were hesitant to vote for this President, the OP would be far more persuasive in getting me to do so, than all those who refuse to recognize why people might feel as they do.

He has made a very excellent case to vote FOR the president.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to JI7 (Reply #18)

Mon Sep 24, 2012, 01:12 PM

488. LOL good thing you aren't working for the campaign

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Kelvin Mace (Original post)

Fri Sep 21, 2012, 05:59 PM

10. Hah!

Don't do us any favors, buddy. Vote for Romney and side with all the repug obstructionists for all I care. The President of all the people will win anyway.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to brush (Reply #10)

Fri Sep 21, 2012, 08:12 PM

58. I have never had an intention, desire or inclination to vote for Romney

 

My credentials as a hard-core liberal have been established beyond question on this site years ago.

I resent any insinuation that I support that corporate goon.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to brush (Reply #10)

Sat Sep 22, 2012, 02:34 PM

321. The old 'if you oppose the Iraq War, you love Saddam' logic.

'Vote for Romney', Really? Is that really what you want people to do? I've always wondered about this tactic, it sure isn't a way to GOTV for Democrats

The OP has provided a reason for people who may have decided not to vote at all, with a very excellent reason TO vote for this President.




Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to sabrina 1 (Reply #321)

Sat Sep 22, 2012, 02:55 PM

330. Like I said

Yeah but it sounds like it's the absolute last thing he wants to do, and he'll be holding his nose while he does it.
With friends like that, who needs repugs.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to brush (Reply #330)

Sat Sep 22, 2012, 03:10 PM

335. A vote is a vote.

If everyone who holds their nose to vote under our current system, took your advice rather than the OP's, Romney probably would win. I don't think we are in a position to tell those who are not terribly enthusiastic but will vote for this President anyway, that 'we don't need friends like that'.

It isn't about having friends. Voters are not looking for personal relationships with politicians, they are looking for reasons to vote FOR someone and the OP has given a not insignificant segment of the population a reason to do that. You otoh, seem to be discouraging people from voting. I'm not as confident as you are that we 'don't need friends like that'.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to brush (Reply #330)

Mon Oct 1, 2012, 11:23 AM

532. Unfortunately there are many of us who will be voting with less enthusiasm this time.

Our enthusiasm level has to do with the things he has done that are within his control (regarding civil rights, drones and endless detention without trial) and not what he hasn't been able to accomplish due to the republicans in congress. We understand why he couldn't accomplish more, so our disillusions are not about getting everything we wanted.

To tell us to stay home or vote for mit is not a very good strategy to get out the vote.

It leaves me with the same feeling that I had after a phone call last night from DSCC. Half way into his spiel asking for a $250 donation, I stopped him and told we were active locally, donated locally and would be voting D. He ignored me and went on with his script asking for a lower amount. I again repeated that we donated locally and would not be giving him a donation. Instead of thanking me for my vote and local support, all I got was the sound of a click as he hung up on me. It left me feeling that all the DSCC cared about was my money and my vote was not needed or appreciated. That is not how you get more D's elected to the Senate. I phoned banked for Obama in 2008 and I wasn't rude to non-supporters let alone someone who supported and told me that they had already donated.

Disclaimer for those who think because my enthusiasm level is not high enough. Like the OP I had to do a lot of soul searching and rationalization, but I will be voting early and it will be for President Obama.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Kelvin Mace (Original post)

Fri Sep 21, 2012, 06:01 PM

11. How do you know the purged voter would have voted for Obama?

I'm confused

Are there also people planning to proxy vote for potentially purged GOP voters?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to leftstreet (Reply #11)

Fri Sep 21, 2012, 06:09 PM

21. The odds are very high that a purged voter would vote for Obama.

Republicans may be generally stupid, but when it comes to cheating and lying, they are very experienced and skilful.

They may purge a very few of their own, and a few third party voters, but the overall benefit of their purge for them would be enormous.

Just vote for Obama, and we'll sort the rest out later.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Zorra (Reply #21)

Fri Sep 21, 2012, 06:11 PM

24. Why weren't they purged in 2008?

Several gazillion people voted for Obama in 2008

Why wouldn't he have those same votes in 2012?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to leftstreet (Reply #24)

Fri Sep 21, 2012, 06:17 PM

25. there have been new attempts to purge more voters

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to leftstreet (Reply #24)

Fri Sep 21, 2012, 06:35 PM

34. If you check the link to the RMS

 

story, you will see this is a recent attempt.

It is happening nationwide.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to leftstreet (Reply #24)

Sat Sep 22, 2012, 04:11 AM

163. Have you been in a cave? You do know what happened in the 2010 midterms, right?

We lost a ton a house seats, governorships, city councils, and state legislatures. Ever hear of ALEC? All because of assholes like the one described in the o.p., who were "disillusioned", and they're still spreading their suppressive bullshit under the guise of voting for "the lesser of two evils".

I'm not a member of the president's campaign team, but if I were, I'd tell folks like that exactly what they could with their "proxy".

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Tarheel_Dem (Reply #163)

Sat Sep 22, 2012, 06:35 AM

195. Oh, so you're saying none of us are disillusioned by what Obama promised and chose

not to pursue? Cute. I'm lying. It's not cute at all.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Tarheel_Dem (Reply #163)

Sat Sep 22, 2012, 09:57 PM

408. Here's what "Kelvin Mace" did in NC...Worked for Verified Voting! INFO:

Kelvin Mace Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue May-09-06 09:22 PM
Response to Reply #253
260. I said "helped"

If I were Bev, I would have claimed to have done it all and smeared anyone who dared disagree.

If you assert that my statement is factually in error, then you are invited to contact NC Verified Voting and ask them. Their leader, Joyce McCloy was honored by the ACLU for her efforts (http://www.newsobserver.com/659/story/410538.html ) in getting S223 passed which outlawed paper-less voting, required disclosure of the source code, and required the CEO's of voting machine companies to sign sworn affidavits that the software used in the election was the same software as certified by the state. Violation of this provision is a FELONY.

Diebold withdrew from NC rather sign that statement.

The fact that Diebold has a manufacturing plant in Lexington, NC is irrelevant. They won't do business with NC because of that provision of the law.

What does that have to do with me?

I wrote that provision when I served on the Select Committee that drafted the law.

'Taint bragging if it is fact.

What has Bev done lately?

Oh yeah, Bev is against the only federal law which would require a VVPB.

Thanks Bev, way to help out.

And before you you even THINK of trashing Joyce, let's look at this news item:

Diebold v. North Carolina Board of Elections
and
McCloy v. North Carolina Board of Elections

State court litigation involving Diebold's attempt to be exempted from state law requirements to escrow all of its system source code on the grounds that it couldn't do so. EFF intervened in the case on behalf of local election integrity advocate Joyce McCloy and convinced the Superior Court to dismiss Diebold's complaint. The Board of Elections nonetheless certified Diebold to sell equipment in the state, despite a statutory requirement to review "all source code" prior to certifying any vendor. EFF filed suit on behalf of McCloy, asking the Court to force the Board to perform its duties. The Court denied EFF's motion, finding for the Board an exemption for the Board from having to inspect "third party software" although such an exemption does not exist in the statute. Nevertheless, Diebold was forced to drop out of the process as it could not escrow all of its code for possible future review.


http://www.eff.org/Activism/E-voting /

McCloy took Diebold to court on principle and prevaled. Bev took Diebold to court and pocketed $70K and sold out Steven Heller.


http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=364&topic_id=1125697&mesg_id=1144623Diebold v. North Carolina Board of Elections
and


-----------------------------------------
McCloy v. North Carolina Board of Elections

State court litigation involving Diebold's attempt to be exempted from state law requirements to escrow all of its system source code on the grounds that it couldn't do so. EFF intervened in the case on behalf of local election integrity advocate Joyce McCloy and convinced the Superior Court to dismiss Diebold's complaint. The Board of Elections nonetheless certified Diebold to sell equipment in the state, despite a statutory requirement to review "all source code" prior to certifying any vendor. EFF filed suit on behalf of McCloy, asking the Court to force the Board to perform its duties. The Court denied EFF's motion, finding for the Board an exemption for the Board from having to inspect "third party software" although such an exemption does not exist in the statute. Nevertheless, Diebold was forced to drop out of the process as it could not escrow all of its code for possible future review.


http://www.eff.org/Activism/E-voting /

McCloy took Diebold to court on principle and prevaled. Bev took Diebold to court and pocketed $70K and sold out Steven Heller.


http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=364&topic_id=1125697&mesg_id=1144623

North Carolina Coalition for Verified Voting - www.ncvoter.net

About us: The North Carolina Coalition for Verified Voting is a grassroots non-partisan organization fighting for clean and verified elections. We study and research the issue of voting to ensure the dignity and integrity of the intention of each voting citizen. The NC Voter Verified Coalition has consistently fought for increasing access, participation and ensuring the voter franchise. Contact Joyce McCloy, Director, N.C. Coalition for Verifiable Voting - phone 336-794-1240 - email Join the NC Coalition for Verified Voting websitewww.ncvoter.net
-------------------
Joyce McCloy Bio

A voting activist since 2003, Joyce McCloy worked for a new law, passed in August 2005, that requires paper records on all voting machines and random post election audits. The law also requires machine manufacturers to explain how their equipment works. McCloy later sued to enforce provisions of that law. In 2006, McCloy worked for and obtained additional legislation to ensure that post election audits would be conducted in a more transparent fashion. In 2007, McCloy worked with The Brennan Center for Justice and Project Vote to eliminate the "No Match No Vote" rule in North Carolina. That legislation was signed into law on August 29, 2007.

McCloy led a 100 county push to encourage the purchase of optical scan systems instead of touch-screen. This led in a decrease of touch-screen counties from 40 to 23. Because of her leadership in the field of election integrity, the American Civil Liberties Union of North Carolina awarded McCloy its 2006 award “for a lifetime of contributions to civil liberties in North Carolina.”

McCloy founded the NC Coalition for Verified Voting in January 2004 and continues to lead the organization. She has authored reports on: The Efficacy of Vote Centers, Cost Study Analysis of North Carolina Voting Systems, Touch-Screen Paper Trail Failures and Problems in North Carolina, Instant Runoff Voting Values and Risks Report, “No Match No Vote in North Carolina - Voter Registration Database as an Administrative Barrier to Voting”, and “Removing Barriers to Voter Verified Paper Ballots - Ballot on Demand to Increase Flexibility of Paper Ballot Voting”. Opinion pieces by McCloy on electronic voting issues have been published by the Charlotte Observer, Raleigh News and Observer, the Asheville Citizen Times and the High Point Enterprise. In 2008 McCloy, assisted by the Brennan Center for Justice raised a statewide alert about straight ticket voting concerns, increasing media attention and direct voter education efforts statewide. McCloy edited a free national voting news letter covering news about election integrity issues, voting machines, election fraud, voter access and legislation in United States and internationally.

McCloy maintains the website www.ncvoter.net and an email list serve to provide information and education to the public about North Carolina voting issues. Additionally McCloy also operates a website www.instantrunoffvoting.us with the goal of educating and informing the public about problems with instant runoff voting. McCloy hold a Bachelor of Science in Criminal Justice Administration from Bluefield State College, but has spent most of her working life in either business or banking operations.



----------------

rom Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search

An expert on electronic voting, Joyce McCloy worked for a new law, passed in August 2005, that requires paper records on all voting machines and random post election audits. The law also requires machine manufacturers to explain how their equipment works. McCloy later sued to enforce provisions of that law. In 2006 McCloy worked for and obtained additional legislation to ensure that post election audits would be conducted in a more transparent fashion. In 2007 McCloy worked with The Brennan Center for Justice and Project Vote to eliminate the "No Match No Vote" rule in North Carolina. That legislation was signed into law on August 29, 07.

McCloy led a 100 county push to encourage the purchase of optical scan systems instead of touch-screen. This led in a decrease of touch-screen counties from 40 to 23. Because of her leadership in the field of election integrity, the American Civil Liberties Union of North Carolina awarded McCloy its 2006 award “for a lifetime of contributions to civil liberties in North Carolina.”

McCloy founded the NC Coalition for Verified Voting in January 2004 and continues to lead the organization. She has authored reports on: The Efficacy of Vote Centers, Cost Study Analysis of North Carolina Voting Systems, Touch-Screen Paper Trail Failures and Problems in North Carolina, Instant Runoff Voting Values and Risks Report, “No Match No Vote in North Carolina - Voter Registration Database as an Administrative Barrier to Voting”, and “Removing Barriers to Voter Verified Paper Ballots - Ballot on Demand to Increase Flexibility of Paper Ballot Voting”. Opinion pieces by McCloy on electronic voting issues have been published by the Charlotte Observer, Raleigh News and Observer, the Asheville Citizen Times and the High Point Enterprise. McCloy also maintains the website www.ncvoter.net and an email list serve to provide information and education to the public.

McCloy hold a Bachelor of Science in Criminal Justice Administration from Bluefield State College, but has spent most of her working life in either business or banking operations.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Joyce_McCloy

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to leftstreet (Reply #24)

Sat Sep 22, 2012, 06:32 AM

194. Uneducated

I do hope this road you're trying to go down ends soon. You're beginning to look foolish. If you aren't even aware of the massively larger attempts at voter purging this year, you have not been paying attention. Even the fictional Will McAvoy is better educated than you on this very, very important topic.

Kelvin Mace is far more educated than you or even me about this very topic though, so playing this game with the master is just not smart.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to leftstreet (Reply #11)

Sat Sep 22, 2012, 06:28 AM

192. You're funny

Oh, wait, you weren't joking, we're you? I would strongly suggest that you bone up on voter suppression. It isn't an equivalence game at all. Our side doesn't practice it. Republicans practice it rampantly. Voting while black, and all........

You've been here a long time, ergo, you cannot be this dumb. Everyone makes undefendable statements from time to time. You're not confused, just uneducated in this area. Actually, your third sentence shows that you aren't really confused, just being a jerk.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to tavalon (Reply #192)

Sat Sep 22, 2012, 12:23 PM

285. What's the Obama Admin doing about this suppression issue?

You're describing a crisis that could dramatically alter the election results. I defer to you here, as I admit I haven't been following this suppression story.

The OP is confusing. OP claims s/he can't vote in good conscience for Obama, but can proxy vote for a suppressed voter - thereby returning an administration to office that the OP can't in good conscience vote to return to office.....

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to leftstreet (Reply #285)

Sat Sep 22, 2012, 07:29 PM

386. Nothing

The OP is well known as an activist for voting rights. This is an elegant way to make a statement, IMO. 98% of people could not have made such an elegant idea work, but given his history, this would be the one way he could find to be okay with voting for Obama. The OP is only confusing if you don't know or educate yourself on the OP's history. This man has done more to protect voting rights than many, if not most in this land of ours.

He's trying to help both disenfranchised and discouraged voters in one fell swoop. He is well aware that Obama is the lesser of two evils, far less with each passing day, but those of us who are highly idealistic (whistleblower personality) may not, even now, be able to find a way to vote for the lesser evil without too hard a hit to our idealism.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Kelvin Mace (Original post)

Fri Sep 21, 2012, 06:02 PM

12. So have you decided not to vote? Throwaway vote which means a vote for Romney?

 

As mentioned above, Congress has fought against him every step of the way making them the most inefficient Congress that I can recall.

Granted, I wanted Guantanamo closed, universal healthcare and us out of Afghanistan but I feel he compromised to get as much done as he could. He's the President, not the King and has to deal with the House and Senate to get things done as well as the monied interests (lobbyists) that are trying to protect the interests of banks, insurance companies, oil, etc.

He has my vote. With hope that he will go "balls out" in the next four years.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Whovian (Reply #12)

Fri Sep 21, 2012, 06:37 PM

36. Please read what I said

 

I made it quite plain what my intent was, and why I was going to such pains to write this post for others like me.

My disagreements with Obama involve issues completely divorced from Congressional involvement.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Kelvin Mace (Reply #36)

Fri Sep 21, 2012, 11:08 PM

114. it was not quite plain

 

and you know it.

you carved it out that way on purpose to get your dig in at the beginning and then to save your 'no vote' ass you 'confess' you will vote.

not as clever as you think.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Whisp (Reply #114)

Sat Sep 22, 2012, 12:43 AM

126. What part of

 

"With this in mind, I have decided that I shall cast a vote for President Obama..." was unclear?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Kelvin Mace (Reply #126)

Sat Sep 22, 2012, 10:06 PM

409. your title says something entirely different

 

don't play coy.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Whisp (Reply #409)

Sun Sep 23, 2012, 01:37 AM

419. You need to read better

don't play dumb



RL

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Whisp (Reply #114)

Sat Sep 22, 2012, 04:33 PM

362. What part of this was not clear?

With this in mind, I have decided that I shall cast a vote for President Obama as a proxy for some person who will be denied that right by corporate sponsored goons, religious zealots, and anti-democratic political groups.


"I shall cast a vote for President Obama . . ."

Was it the "shall" that threw you? It is the grammatically correct word to use in that sentence construction and it is abundantly clear that the OPs intends to vote for President Obama.

Couldn't get any clearer - and your attempt to invent some convoluted, illogical, and rude accusation is a complete failure.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Whisp (Reply #114)

Sat Sep 22, 2012, 09:42 PM

406. It was very plain to anyone who read the entire post.

Not everyone tries to be clever. There are actually truly principled and honest people who actually think about important issues, who are disillusioned with the direction this country has gone since the stolen election of 2000 and of how little fight there has been to stop the Democracy destroying policies of the unelected administration.

A vote is a vote. And every vote counts. I see a few people in this thread telling others to take 'your vote and shove it'. THAT is called suppressing votes and imo, makes me wonder exactly where they are coming from and/or what their real intentions are.

.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Whovian (Reply #12)

Sat Sep 22, 2012, 06:36 AM

196. Read to the end

The punchline is at the end. It could have saved you a lot of typing.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Kelvin Mace (Original post)

Fri Sep 21, 2012, 06:03 PM

13. "please be as strident in pressing the President back to doing what is right" = dream on.

 

"not now, not the right time"

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to HiPointDem (Reply #13)

Fri Sep 21, 2012, 08:12 PM

59. *sigh*

 

I know, but I can dream, can't I.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Kelvin Mace (Reply #59)

Fri Sep 21, 2012, 11:59 PM

121. Yes, release your inner Pollyana! It's helped me...

Pollyana came to me and suggested that Obama made the choices he did to set his campaign up to be as strong as possible to get re-elected. He peppered in enough conservative 'bits' to keep negative campaign commercials to a minimum (if you watch what's out there, the commercials are tinged with made-up stuff that's fairly insane; if he'd come out charging with a progressive flair they would have had much more ammunition to use against him, possibly making him lose the election and the result would have been worse).

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Kelvin Mace (Original post)

Fri Sep 21, 2012, 06:03 PM

14. Obamacare is a significant change IMO

So are the end of Iraq and the near-end of Afghanistan.

Torture is not used any more and no new people are put in Gitmo, and Gitmo we be closed if not for Congress

There is a major change in how we are seen in the rest of the world, for the better.

We still have a right wing, we had 2010, we have the filibuster used on everything - considering on that the President is a success.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to treestar (Reply #14)

Sun Sep 23, 2012, 10:20 AM

436. Obamacare is not what was promised: It is a windfall for the insurance compaines

 

"Torture is not used any more..." The evidence you have for this assertion is?

However if, in fact, America is no longer torturing people - why not? If it is because torture is immoral, illegal and despicable, then why have those who admittedly performed it been given immunity from prosecution by the current administration?

"Gitmo we be closed if not for Congress" the president's plan was, at root, simply a plan to move GITMO to the US. The prisoners would not be freed, they would not have their right of Habeas Corpus recognized. They would have remained the disappeared.

What counts as ending the wars - the eternal occupation as envisioned by the current administration?

One can go on and criticize Obama for his assertion of the right to murder people (even American citizens) anywhere in the world at the whim of the American president, the shredding of the Fourth Amendment, the lack of any meaningful action against those whole stole the economy ... etc etc

At least when the Republicans were in charge, the Democrats were willing to criticize these totalitarian abuses of power - now that we are in charge, our lips are sealed.

Truly, I do not know how I can ethically vote for Obama.



OP's thought - that one could consider it a proxy vote for those disenfranchised - is the best rationale which I have heard. I just do not know that I can do it.






Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to panzerfaust (Reply #436)

Sun Sep 23, 2012, 05:32 PM

440. You see things in such a negative way

There has been huge improvement over the Bush years. Thanks to your staying home in 2010 there was no more that it was possible to do. And you aren't supposed to be advocating not voting for Democrats at this point.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to panzerfaust (Reply #436)

Mon Sep 24, 2012, 12:25 PM

475. "I just do not know that I can do it".

Sounds to me like you and the o.p. are in the wrong place, at the wrong time. Some of us have an election to win, and we don't need this suppressive bullshit only weeks away from a major election. Neither of you are slick or clever at all. Everyone reading these comments knows exactly what you're up to, it's called "S-U-P-P-R-E-S-S-I-O-N".

"Truly, I do not know how I can ethically vote for Obama."


"OP's thought - that one could consider it a proxy vote for those disenfranchised - is the best rationale which I have heard. I just do not know that I can do it."


One can't help but wonder why you guys are still hanging out here, on a board whose mission is to "elect Democrats". I really wish Skinner would drop the hammer on this shit for the next few weeks.


Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Kelvin Mace (Original post)

Fri Sep 21, 2012, 06:04 PM

15. I don't need to read your 'letter'.

 

If you're looking for Utopia, you're looking in the wrong place.

Obama has done some good. He has not done 100% of what anyone would want him to do.

Big surprise, isn't it, that you don't get everything on your list for Christmas!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to randome (Reply #15)

Fri Sep 21, 2012, 06:42 PM

38. NO, I am not looking for Utopia

 

Just a country which does not torture people, murder people or imprison them without trial for life.

It is fascinating that I have gone to considerable effort to create an ethical reason to vote for Obama, yet some people here seem find this offensive.

Why do you choose to demean my efforts with snark and dismissal?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Kelvin Mace (Reply #38)

Fri Sep 21, 2012, 06:50 PM

41. It's just confusing

You're essentially saying you can't in good conscience vote for a President that allows torture, murder and imprisonment without trial - but you'll proxy vote for someone who WOULD vote for a President that allows torture, murder and imprisonment without trial, but may have his/her right to vote restricted in some way.

By your own reasoning, you could be responsible for 4 more years of an Administration that that allows torture, murder and imprisonment without trial.

Not seeing how this eases your mind

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to leftstreet (Reply #41)

Fri Sep 21, 2012, 08:16 PM

60. Same as if I mailed a ballot

 

for someone.

It's that simple.

I am not judging other people who wish to make their vote based on pragmatism (lesser of two evils). I hold this opinion, but I could certainly be wrong. I think I am on safe ground doing my best to prevent voter suppression by proxy. 'Tis an imperfect world.

I certainly can't please everyone. Damned if I do, damned if I don't.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Kelvin Mace (Reply #38)

Fri Sep 21, 2012, 07:11 PM

48. My point is that no one is perfect.

 

You seem to be saying that you're disappointed that Obama isn't perfect.

I understand your reservations about the things you mention but that's certainly no reason to even CONSIDER letting someone else take the Presidency.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to randome (Reply #48)

Sat Sep 22, 2012, 12:48 AM

130. Please, point to the part where I say

 

I expected Obama to be perfect.

No, I just expected him to end Bush's policies, not expand them.

For me, to vote for Obama would be to sanction the expansion of these policies. I understand the "lesser of two evils" argument, but it doesn't sway me. When the ship of state is already under the waves plunging to the bottom, the speed at which it hits the sea floor is kind of irrelevant.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Kelvin Mace (Reply #130)

Sat Sep 22, 2012, 08:14 AM

231. "Ship of state is already under the waves".

 

You see, that's not a statistic or observation. That's an evaluation. One you seem predisposed to make. In fact, it sounds like something someone would say who's depressed.

I can't tell you that Obama -or any other politician, for that matter- will right the wrongs you list. Hell, why do we still have starving children in the world? All those things you mention pale in comparison to that, IMO.

You could just as easily ask why YOU aren't seeing that these wrongs are righted. It's easy to say a politician should see to it for you. As long as you spend five minutes on a computer posting on DU, you don't really think those things are important. You think it's important that a politician think they're important.

We are all guilty of that.

I don't like to advocate 'trusting' anyone, especially a politician. I prefer to judge everyone by what they do or say NOW. But my personal evaluation is that Obama will do best for this country. I want the things you listed to be addressed, too. But if anyone stands a snowball's chance in hell of doing that during the next four years, it's Obama.

You work with what you got.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to randome (Reply #15)

Tue Sep 25, 2012, 05:53 AM

528. Well if Utopia means simply not killing any more people in foreign countries, or

locking people up for the rest of their lives until they commit suicide or die of old age, without charges and without trials. If it means ending torture and maybe applying the rule of law to War Criminals and Wall Street criminals as vigilently as it is applied to put smokers, that would a start on the long road to Utopia.

I guess the bar for Utopia is so low now, that just ending those Bush policies and just going back to the pre-Bush era, which wasn't that great, but it sure looks like Utopia now.

However since Democrats have embraced all of the Bush policies we were so opposed to now, we are not even close to starting on the road to Utopia. More like going in the opposite direction.

I'd be happy if you were just headed in the right direction.

So, maybe you should consider giving up the use of that ancient talking point, attacking people who are simply asking for a country that doesn't act like a brutal Empire, by telling them they are 'looking for Utopia'.

That is just plain ridiculous. Are you satisfied to be living in a country that was created by Bush/Cheney & Company? Who could have imagined that people on the so-called Left would become so accepting of what once the Left was so vocally opposed to.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Kelvin Mace (Original post)

Fri Sep 21, 2012, 06:05 PM

16. What did you want from Obama that he hasn't delivered? Serious question....

 


If you are LGBT... he has been the most LGBT-friendly President in this nation's history.

If you are anti-war... he has ended the Iraq war, and is on track to end the Afghanistan war soon. Maybe neither of those things is as fast as you want it, but they are light years further along than they would've been with another President.

If you are out of work... you are in that position because of the GOP and the President has done everything he can to get the unemployment rate down and he is being blocked at every turn.


Like someone else said... he is not a king. But he has advanced the ball for progressives more than it would have been had he lost in 2008. Maybe he hasn't advanced it where you want it to be, but it is further along.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to scheming daemons (Reply #16)

Fri Sep 21, 2012, 06:44 PM

39. I posted a link above for the people who keep asking me "why"

 

Despite my expressing that I wasn't here to argue the issue, I am being asked (and in some cases demanded) to explain myself.

If you seriously wish to know why I have a problem with Obama, go here:

http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1124&pid=3447

I am trying to provide a solution for people who find themselves with my dilemma.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Kelvin Mace (Reply #39)

Sat Sep 22, 2012, 09:32 PM

404. Kelvin - I Went To Your Link...

...and read your list. I couldn't agree with you more. But of course, you and I would be considered "radical" when all along, we thought of ourselves as merely Democrats.

-PLA

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to WiffenPoof (Reply #404)

Sun Sep 23, 2012, 10:23 PM

442. I've always just viewed myself as a liberal

 

The term Democrat includes the likes of Zell Miller and Joe Lieberman.

Thanks for taking the time to read my post.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to scheming daemons (Reply #16)


Response to Kelvin Mace (Original post)

Fri Sep 21, 2012, 06:08 PM

20. A vote is a vote

A vote cast grudgingly is worth the same as one cast with enthusiasm.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Kelvin Mace (Original post)

Fri Sep 21, 2012, 06:11 PM

22. I will say that their voter suppression efforts pulled me off the sidelines

you want to get me involved?

Suppress the vote. Assholes.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to jsmirman (Reply #22)

Sat Sep 22, 2012, 06:41 AM

197. Since I know this guys history,

I know that's what pulled him off the sidelines too.

It's a shame that too few people here know the effort he has put into election fraud issues and even got defrauded himself in the process. I'm surprised he can still find a reason to keep up the effort.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Kelvin Mace (Original post)

Fri Sep 21, 2012, 06:11 PM

23. I appreciate what you are doing

as another person who is far more liberal than Obama, I too will be casting my vote for him.
But I didn't have an issue of conscience in doing so.
I'd say a year ago I was much more disappointed in Obama than I am now.
So I can say not only am I voting against Romney, I am in fact voting for Obama.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Fresh_Start (Reply #23)

Fri Sep 21, 2012, 09:15 PM

78. Yeah, the closer the election got

 

the further Left he drifted.

Dum spiro spreo!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Kelvin Mace (Reply #78)

Sat Sep 22, 2012, 06:43 AM

198. Now, we just need to keep him there

I definitely prefer Candidate Obama to President Obama, at least version 1.0. Hopefully, 2.0 will be better, with fewer pragmatic, corporate, craven, back room negotiating crapolas.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Kelvin Mace (Original post)

Fri Sep 21, 2012, 06:23 PM

28. I think you are a wise and honest person. Hat's off to you!! nt

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to nanabugg (Reply #28)

Fri Sep 21, 2012, 06:45 PM

40. Thank you

 

glad to know some people understand I am trying to help.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Kelvin Mace (Reply #40)

Fri Sep 21, 2012, 09:36 PM

90. I also appreciate your honesty. I am sick to death of the pretentious, dishonest system

I have discovered we live under and the fact that each election season, the usual admonitions to not even think, but just accept the status quo without uttering a word of objection, has been one of the main contributing factors to why things are only getting worse.

I agree with every word you said and share your conscientious objections to the policies that WE THOUGHT we were voting against when we so naively and enthusiastically worked to get this President elected and to give him a Democratic congress.

People are no longer so naive. We are where we are because of the political operatives who try each election season to shut down all dissent. Although it's getting harder and harder for them to do this.

I will never remain silent about torture and extra-judicial killings and all the other Bush policies that some appear to have embraced now that Bush is no longer in the WH.

You have provided a conscientious solution for those who found it difficult to support those policies.

Yes, he is better than Romney on so many levels. We don't have a choice which is not a good feeling.

So, I appreciate your giving us a cause to vote FOR, people's right to vote, rather than simply voting AGAINST Romney.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Kelvin Mace (Reply #40)

Fri Sep 21, 2012, 09:51 PM

99. I will join sabrina

thanking you for saying all of this. I agree with everything you said. Although I never expected Obama to do much of anything I was hoping for (he did some of them though) I have still been disappointed and I anticipate that will be the way things are from now until I cast my final vote. Some are tolerable though. Still it is my choice to deal with. You should never have to tell anyone, much less a website who you are voting for.

This is the kind of discussion we should be having rather than "you are a such and such" or "grow up" and all kinds of attempts to shut down the discussion.

It always cracks me up when people jump all over a post like this without reading to the end, realizing how much thought you have put into the post or the personal crisis this kind of thing causes. It would be so much easier to just say, YAY TEAM and vote without thought.

Some people will be thrilled with him because he is just what they want. Some will be thrilled because he is on their team. Some will not be happy and not vote for him and some will not be happy and they will vote for him.

I don't understand the reason to piss all over a thread like this.

Thank you.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Kelvin Mace (Original post)

Fri Sep 21, 2012, 06:24 PM

29. I would hope you would vote for Obama, he is the best

We have great visions and sometimes you are unable to do everything you want and in this case the do nothing House for the past two years has blocked intelligent decisions and then the filibuster Senate was unable to do other things. Obama is not a failure, yeh repubs wanted him to look bad but they look bad themselves. Come on back into the Democrat fold and vote for best man.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Thinkingabout (Reply #29)

Fri Sep 21, 2012, 08:03 PM

54. I am a liberal, not a Democrat

 

As I keep explaining, my problems with the President involve issues of morality and ethics within his powers and do not involve Congress.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Kelvin Mace (Original post)

Fri Sep 21, 2012, 06:25 PM

31. Its a vote...I'll take it.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Kelvin Mace (Original post)

Fri Sep 21, 2012, 06:39 PM

37. I hear you on being disappointed on MAJOR issues

nevertheless I will be casting my vote for Obama ENTHUSIASTICALLY...not just because the Republicans are worse than I have ever seen in my 20 plus years of following politics but because I do feel like he is on the right side of many issues important to me.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to ibegurpard (Reply #37)

Fri Sep 21, 2012, 09:17 PM

79. And I am glad you are happy with your vote

 

Seriously, I hope to be very wrong and see Obama go paleolithic on their asses.

I just want to see him on the LEFT side of more issues.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Kelvin Mace (Original post)

Fri Sep 21, 2012, 06:50 PM

42. K&R Kevin. I see what you're doing.

Giving a way for those disappointed with Obama's first term lack of miracles a rational reason to come out and vote for him anyway.
Well done.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to trof (Reply #42)

Fri Sep 21, 2012, 09:19 PM

81. Thanks, that is precisely what I am trying to achieve

 

I WANT to believe, but I have been disappointed so many times, and found myself with only dark choices.

I really wish the folks in this thread being so dismissive and snarky would understand what I am trying to do.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Kelvin Mace (Original post)

Fri Sep 21, 2012, 06:58 PM

43. whatever you think about Obama - SUPREME COURT SUPREME COURT SUPREME COURT nt

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to MariaM83 (Reply #43)

Fri Sep 21, 2012, 09:23 PM

82. This argument has been brought up many times

 

The SCOTUS is already a lost cause. We lost it in 05-06 when the Dems refused to filibuster Alito and Roberts.

Also, even if he wins, the GOP is NOT going to allow Obama to appoint any other judges PERIOD.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Kelvin Mace (Reply #82)

Sat Sep 22, 2012, 07:40 AM

227. Whoa! Hold on there!

Also, even if he wins, the GOP is NOT going to allow Obama to appoint any other judges PERIOD.


Scenerio: two months into Obama's second term a Supreme suddenly dies, for whatever reason.

Are you actually claiming that the GOP would hold up a SCOTUS nomination for four years?

There is a phrase for such a scenerio. It is called a Constitutional Crisis. The last one happened in the years 1973-1974, beginning with the Saturday Night Massacre which single-handedly triggered the House Judiciary Committee to begin an impeachment investigation targeting President Nixon.

If you actually suggesting such a thing, I am flabbergasted and would like to read how you rationalize such an opinion to yourself. It sounds almost delusional.

I was reading this thread and generally supportive of both your OP and your responses in spite of my general disagreement on several points. I was not going to respond at all but I cannot let this claim to go unchallenged.

I am sorry about this. I support your post until this (in spite of my disagreement).


Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to longship (Reply #227)

Sat Sep 22, 2012, 08:10 AM

230. The Supreme Court

 

Are you actually claiming that the GOP would hold up a SCOTUS nomination for four years?


In a word, yes. In fact, they don't need to hold it up for four years, just two since nominations die with the swearing in of a new Congress after the midterms. Of course, nothing would stop Obama from renominating the same person, but remember what Einstein said about insanity.

And why would they necessarily filibuster his Supreme Court nominees? He's already replaced two of the four liberals on the Court with people to the right of who they replaced, why should we expect him to do different if Ginsburg and Breyer retire as expected? They might see the possibility of allowing the move to the right to continue to be a slow drift instead of a steady march, until they can get a President more to their liking in.


Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Pab Sungenis (Reply #230)

Sat Sep 22, 2012, 08:36 AM

241. In other words, you are suggesting that Republicans will trigger a Constitutional crisis.

I am sorry. You've lost my support here.

No party would dare do what you are suggesting, even for merely two years.

Anyway, I suspect that Harry Reid may very well pull the Senatorial nuclear trigger when Congress convenes in January (depending on the outcome in November). So there may not even be a filibuster to filibuster.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to longship (Reply #241)

Sat Sep 22, 2012, 08:58 AM

248. "In other words, you are suggesting that Republicans will trigger a Constitutional crisis."

 

They already have. They destroyed the country's credit rating with their debt ceiling bullshit. They've shown over and over again that they will do anything to oppose Obama.

I pray Harry Reid will continue to grow a spine like he's apparently been doing the past year or so. But I wish he had done it back in 2009 when it would have done us some good.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Pab Sungenis (Reply #248)

Sat Sep 22, 2012, 09:55 AM

260. Okay. Understand that I still wish to be with you here.

I disagree but have sympathy for your general position. (No, I would prefer not to go into minutia on that.)

Maybe you weren't politically aware in Ictober, 1973. But this is how the mainstream media handles a Constitutional crisis:

Good evening. The country tonight is in the midst of what may be the most serious constitutional crisis in its history. The president has fired... The special Watergate prosecutor, Archibald Cox, and he has sent FBI agents to the office of the special prosecution staff and to the Attorney General and the Deputy Attorney General and the President ordered the FBI to seal off those offices. Because of the President's action, the Attorney General has resigned.

Elliot Richardson, who was appointed Attorney General only last May in the midst of the Watergate scandal, has quit, saying he cannot carry out Mr. Nixon's instructions. Richardson's deputy, Mr. William Ruckelshaus, has been fired. Ruckelshaus refused in a moment of constitutional drama to obey a presidential order to fire the special Watergate prosecutor. The President has abolished the special Watergate prosecutor Cox's office and duties and turned the prosecution of Watergate crimes over to the Justice Department.

...

In my career as a correspondent, I never thought I'd be announcing these things.


John Chancellor, Oct 21, 1973. At that time, a 25 year journalist veteran.


That, my friend, is what a constitutional crisis looks like. Within a week, the House Judiciary Committee convened to consider impeachment of the President.

And please do not argue about today's lame media. If another thing such as this happened again, it would be huge news. Stopping all SCOTUS nominees for months, years would do the same. It cuts to the core of division of powers, which is the main characteristic of these things.

I know there are other analogues today. But stopping all SCOTUS nominees would be front page news and cuts to the core of Constitutional powers.



Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to longship (Reply #260)

Sat Sep 22, 2012, 10:52 AM

267. The question remains, would the Republicans do that?

 

I argue that their actions these past four years suggest they would.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Pab Sungenis (Reply #267)

Sat Sep 22, 2012, 11:23 AM

270. That's a tall claim.

You arent even the DUer I addressed my post to. He/She is notably silent on the issue.

I am done in this thread.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to longship (Reply #260)

Sat Sep 22, 2012, 03:04 PM

333. We have been in crisis

 

since Bush v. Gore in 2000 when the SCOTUS appointed Bush president.

Again, I assert, the SCOTUS is a lost cause.

I would also point out that if Nixon were in office today, his actions would have been legalized as they were when Bush did pretty much the same thing Nixon did (illegal wire taps).

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to longship (Reply #241)

Sat Sep 22, 2012, 02:59 PM

332. Hope you are right

 

I genuinely do. But I have seen too much in the last decade to have much faith left.

I'll believe the Democrats will carry out threat X, when they do in fact carry it out.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to longship (Reply #227)

Sat Sep 22, 2012, 02:56 PM

331. Honestly?

 

Are you actually claiming that the GOP would hold up a SCOTUS nomination for four years?

Yes. I do.

My reasoning is pretty straightforward:

The Congress has reached historical levels of dysfunction. It has spent almost four years of constant escalation, and I see no reason for it to stop. Every day the GOP becomes more and more disconnected from reality and delusional. I really don't see this ending.

Might I point out that we are currently prosecuting soldiers for planning a military coup?

But, let us assume that they do allow a nominee to go through. The trend since about 1970 has been that every new appointee is to the right of the justice he/she replaced. The court is SO far tro the right now that Kennedy is considered a "centrist". But assume that we see the second coming of Thurgood Marshall. The court would still be 5-4 hard right. The Scalito Five are going to be around a long time, and we are already in the process of imploding thanks to the Citizens United decision.

What will happen when indefinite detention without trial is legalized (a position Obama SUPPORTS I might add)?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Kelvin Mace (Original post)

Fri Sep 21, 2012, 06:59 PM

45. I know three David Allens now.

 

One is a friend, and the other is you and Skinner.

Just wondering if you are the same David Allen from the old Plan 9 Publishing who used to publish hysterical BOFH series...

(and a few other good old geek books too)

In any case, I've decided that Romney is worse, and I happen to live in a battleground state like you do, and even though Obama's DOJ offends me greatly (in both ways - the bank screwing continues, and one that hit close to home as a MMJ patient). One of my pet issue of legalizing marijuana is on the ballot, and even though I am not as thrilled (but starting to warm up again) about Obama on those issues, Romney is way worse.

Worst part - my father is still anti-Obama even though he has seen improvements in his life from the past 4 years - he got Medicare and SS early after his lymphoma went into remission, but he is still bitter about having to pay heavy insurance costs to cover both him and my mom - I already have my SSDI and Medicare, and continue to work for my dad. Right now, only my mother has to cover for her insurance for another six more months, then she'll get her benefits at 65. Mom is secretly voting for Obama, though to cancel Dad's vote out - and will get +2 Obama votes (wife is voting absentee).




Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Panasonic (Reply #45)

Fri Sep 21, 2012, 09:23 PM

83. Yes, I am that David Allen

 



The publisher guy.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Kelvin Mace (Reply #83)

Fri Sep 21, 2012, 10:37 PM

106. Did your publishing business fold because of the * years?

 

Any chance of restarting it?

I might have a few ideas, including writing a novel, but just need to find a publisher.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Panasonic (Reply #106)

Sat Sep 22, 2012, 12:42 AM

125. Two things sank me

 

The economic implosion and a lot of time and money I spent on the e-voting issue.

No chance at this time of starting it back up, as the market has changed rapidly since then. I certainly don't mind offering advice and encouragement for your effort. Drop me a message if you want to discuss it.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Kelvin Mace (Reply #125)

Sat Sep 22, 2012, 06:48 AM

199. I figured that had something to do with it.

I'm so glad that my senior brain can no longer conjure up that fucking ^$%%#^'s name.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Kelvin Mace (Reply #83)

Sat Sep 22, 2012, 09:45 AM

256. OMFG! I bow before you

As one of the ancients, I loved BOFH!

Oh, I'm totally with you here. It was also e-voting (evil-voting I'm in Md) that got me into wonkdom.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Kelvin Mace (Original post)

Fri Sep 21, 2012, 07:03 PM

46. Fellow resident of NC--never was enchanted with Obama--but I don't need an excuse

to vote for him.

As others have said...the choice is obvious. NOT voting gives Romney an edge in NC and I would NEVER
vote for Romney.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to mnhtnbb (Reply #46)

Fri Sep 21, 2012, 09:25 PM

84. I intended to vote in all races

 

except the presidency.

With these vile attempts at voter suppression, I vote as a proxy and hope for the best.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Kelvin Mace (Original post)

Fri Sep 21, 2012, 07:26 PM

50. Just like Senator Sanders said this very day (paraphrasing) "Vote for President Obama because

 

there is no sane choice and work like hell from November 7th onward to make him do what needs to be done".

I'm completely agree with you on this. The President has failed on so many fronts and has pursued straight-up republican policies where the welfare of the people is concerned that I cannot vote for him, but he gets my vote against Rmoney.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Egalitarian Thug (Reply #50)

Fri Sep 21, 2012, 08:01 PM

53. I was going to post something like this because I heard him too

He handled the question (from the Green Party voter, right?) very well, I thought, and he's right IMO. (I can be persuaded of just about anything if Bernie Sanders says it. There is nobody I trust more.) A vote for anybody other than Obama is a vote for Romney. The day after Election Day, not the day itself, is the right time to pressure the President to do what needs to be done.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to renate (Reply #53)

Fri Sep 21, 2012, 10:27 PM

104. 534 clones of Bernie Sanders, please. What the hell happened to us?

 

Peace.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Kelvin Mace (Original post)

Fri Sep 21, 2012, 07:32 PM

51. I think that you're very naive

Obama never actually claimed to be a progressive. His record and his campaign gave no indication that he would be governing from the left; if you feel betrayed and disappointed it's because you saw what you wanted to see instead of what was actually there. Obama is a centre-right moderate; I have not been especially disappointed by his actions in office because I didn't have false expectations. And I'm not exactly sure how you expect him to've enacted 'progressive' policies without the votes in Congress to pass them; imposing an agenda you happen to approve of by presidential fiat and completely ignoring the Constitution and separation of powers is just the sort of thing that you'd be screaming blue murder over if a Republican were doing it.

As to your laundry list of various complaints about Obama:

1) The prisoners at Guantanamo not getting fair trials, or trials all.


This is within the scope of existing law: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Military_Commissions_Act_of_2006

You may disagree with the law (I do, personally), but expecting something different to happen without sufficient political will to overturn the act (either by the Supreme Court or by an act of Congress) is frankly, well, naive. As the Military Commissions Act is an act of Congress it's not within the President's authority to act contrary to the law by saying "well no actually we won't follow the procedure set out here".

2) People upset over Obama appointing a Monsanto exec as senior advisor to the FDA.


Which is different to a president appointing a GM executive to the Department of Commerce or a former JP Morgan banker to the Treasury how, exactly?

3) People who continue to lose jobs because of the "free trade deals" Obama champions.


See Paul Krugman on free trade and comparative advantage, here: http://web.mit.edu/krugman/www/ricardo.htm This amounts to "I don't understand economics".

4) Innocent people murdered by drones.


One's view on this largely depends on whether you accept the argument that the drones are being used to target "enemy combatants" in Afghanistan and Pakistan. Like it or not, the US is at war in Afghanistan against an insurgent enemy. Whether you think we should be there or not (I don't) some level of collateral damage is unavoidable and targeting with drones means fewer American casualties.

5) People upset over the continuation and EXPANSION of Bush domestic spying policies.


Which is disappointing but then the expansion of the national security state tends to go in one direction; it's not any different to the use of domestic wiretaps of civil rights organisers by the FBI under JFK.

6) The complete failure of Obama to investigate war crimes.


No US president is going to investigate putative war crimes that may have been committed by his predecessor or by American troops. The most that might happen is a few token trials of individual soldiers for specific actions without any recognition that those actions were due to any official policy.

7) The lack of prosecution for Wall Street fraud that have cost the U.S. tax payer $1 trillion plus and counting.


"Fraud" is by and large an overstatement. There was a lot of money lost in questionable investments in the financial crisis; the actions that led to that money being lost were all perfectly legal thanks to deregulation of the financial sector.

8) People mad about continued "secret" loans to banks by the Fed with no transparency.


Because not ensuring liquidity and the overall stability of the banking system would be a much better option.

9) Appointing the people most responsible for the Great Recession to clean it up.


You know who FDR appointed to head the Securities and Exchange Commission? Joe Kennedy.

10) Letting the insurance industry call the shots on health care reform, resulting in a sweet deal for them and crumbs for us.


The votes weren't there for single payer, and the ACA was the best option available. Sometimes you have to be a pragmatic incrementalist.


It's great that you've reconsidered your position, although considering the state of American politics generally, I would seriously have to ask you: do you have any viable options? Your ideal candidate would be someone who'd never get elected. So your choice is: someone who does a lot of things you don't like, but who nonetheless manages to do some good and arguably even 'progressive' things, or someone whose ideology you oppose completely whose administration would be reactionary and would do nothing at all that could be described as progressive. The lesser of two evils may not be what you want but it's better than the alternative.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Spider Jerusalem (Reply #51)

Fri Sep 21, 2012, 07:50 PM

52. Damn! Thanks for laying it all out like that!

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Spider Jerusalem (Reply #51)

Fri Sep 21, 2012, 08:16 PM

61. This is one of the best post on DU that I've seen

in the ten years I've been here! A down-to-earth realistic view of a president-- not a god, king, or Santa Claus.

No, president will give us everything we want. But, as you so eloquently stated:

Your ideal candidate would be someone who'd never get elected. So your choice is: someone who does a lot of things you don't like, but who nonetheless manages to do some good and arguably even 'progressive' things, or someone whose ideology you oppose completely whose administration would be reactionary and would do nothing at all that could be described as progressive. The lesser of two evils may not be what you want but it's better than the alternative.


Thank-you, thank-you, thank-you!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Spider Jerusalem (Reply #51)

Fri Sep 21, 2012, 08:17 PM

62. Absolutely right. Thanks for summarizing it so succinctly.

If we were to wait for a candidate who met every single one of the ideals we hold sacred, we would never vote for anyone.

There is no perfect politician or candidate. There never has been and there never will be.

The author of the OP is expecting far too much, in my opinion.

Still going to vote for Obama, but is only do so by using some convoluted logic and a weak explanation for it is quite silly.

Vote for Obama because he embodies the best candidate that meets the majority of the criteria you have set. Don't come up with some lame excuse for it.

If you can't do that, then don't vote. It pains me to say that, but that is the way I feel.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Spider Jerusalem (Reply #51)

Fri Sep 21, 2012, 09:29 PM

87. Wish I could Rec a reply! AWESOME!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to SunsetDreams (Reply #87)

Sat Sep 22, 2012, 07:34 PM

392. Same here!

Terrific response. Thank you, SJ.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Spider Jerusalem (Reply #51)

Fri Sep 21, 2012, 09:48 PM

95. Thank you!! Obama will go down as one of the greatest presidents of ALL time!!

 

Give him another term. Give the man a chance. He has face unprecedented obstruction and adversity on every side.

You gave Clinton a chance and he is MORE conservative and corporatist than Obama. Why not give Obama once more chance?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Liberal_Stalwart71 (Reply #95)

Sat Sep 22, 2012, 02:44 PM

327. Actually...

 

You gave Clinton a chance and he is MORE conservative and corporatist than Obama. Why not give Obama once more chance?

I was quite critical of Clinton, and I didn't give a rat's ass about his personal life.

Give him another term. Give the man a chance.

I thought that was what I was doing. This is why I am puzzled as to why people are so pissed that I am doing it.

He has face unprecedented obstruction and adversity on every side.

As I outlined above, my objections involved areas totally with the jurisdiction of the executive branch. I have not blamed him for anything involving Congressional obstruction.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Kelvin Mace (Reply #327)

Sat Sep 22, 2012, 07:47 PM

396. Well, that's good news. I'm glad you're onboard. I haven't been happy with everything,

 

and I would be concerned if a person agreed with EVERYTHING *any* politician does.

But I believe that if we work to give this man a Congress that he can work with and because he's no longer politically vulnerable since it'll be his second term, he'll likely be more progressive than he's been. HOWEVER...we must give him the Congress he needs in order to get more progressive legislation done.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Spider Jerusalem (Reply #51)

Sat Sep 22, 2012, 01:43 AM

152. If I had your patience. You completely de-constructed bullshit and showed it for what it is. nt

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to bluestate10 (Reply #152)

Sat Sep 22, 2012, 02:40 PM

325. So, unless I vote

 

for Obama for reasons you and Spider approve of, my post is "bullshit".

My, how enlightened.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Spider Jerusalem (Reply #51)

Sat Sep 22, 2012, 06:50 AM

200. Idealistic was the word you were looking for

The OP is not naive. Not by a long shot.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Spider Jerusalem (Reply #51)

Sat Sep 22, 2012, 12:31 PM

290. Oh the irony - it burns!

I am in awe of the sublime disconnect between your post and the quote in your sig line!

Cheers!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Vinnie From Indy (Reply #290)

Sat Sep 22, 2012, 02:39 PM

324. Yeah, you caught that...

 

I was going to comment, but I written enough in response to him.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Vinnie From Indy (Reply #290)

Mon Sep 24, 2012, 03:46 AM

449. A lot of people seem to have that syndrome in this thread

There's a poster further down that is so mad at the OP they tell him to "keep his vote," and in the sig is a line about respecting the opinions of those who disagree with him. Lol.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Spider Jerusalem (Reply #51)

Sat Sep 22, 2012, 02:37 PM

323. In repsonse

 

Please note that I said my OP that I didn't want to have this argument, I simply wanted to explain why, despite my objections, I would in fact vote for Obama. The point of the post was to help people who had similar objections by giving them an ethical justification to vote "for" rather than "against".

But people refused to accept this. They demanded to know WHY I held my view, and then they decided to tell me why I was "wrong" as you are doing here when I explained why. Apparently, my vote is not wanted unless I worship at the Obama Altar without question.

A number of people in this thread did see my point and will now vote for Obama. I would think this would make Obama supporters happy, but it doesn't for some strange reason.

So, on to your rebuttal:

Obama never actually claimed to be a progressive


Never claimed he did. Obama is definitely right of center. I recall making this point when he ran in 2008, and got a lot of similar abuse.

You may disagree with the law (I do, personally), but expecting something different to happen without sufficient political will to overturn the act (either by the Supreme Court or by an act of Congress) is frankly, well, naive.


Actually, what he has to do is simple: Nothing. He needs to STOP appealing court decisions that say he does not have the right to hold people forever without trial. He is fighting to keep people at Guantanamo. All I ask that he do is STOP THAT. Take the court ruling and say, well, the judge said we (actually Bush) were wrong.

Not an unreasonable expectation. He actually did do precisely this with DOMA. Why can't he do it with illegal detention?

Which is different to a president appointing a GM executive to the Department of Commerce or a former JP Morgan banker to the Treasury how, exactly?


You will have to give me some context for this. Who did the appointing? Just off the top of my head the answer would be that there is no difference and it would be just as wrong which is why he should not do it.

See Paul Krugman on free trade and comparative advantage, here: http://web.mit.edu/krugman/www/ricardo.htm This amounts to "I don't understand economics".


I do believe that Krugman does make distinctions between "free trade" as practiced, and "fair trade" which is the better solution, but hell you can have this one.

One's view on this largely depends on whether you accept the argument that the drones are being used to target "enemy combatants" in Afghanistan and Pakistan. Like it or not, the US is at war in Afghanistan against an insurgent enemy. Whether you think we should be there or not (I don't) some level of collateral damage is unavoidable and targeting with drones means fewer American casualties.


I have heard these kinds of legalistic arguments before. Didn't buy them from John Woo, don't buy them from Obama. As I recall, they didn't accept these arguments at Nuremberg either.

Which is disappointing but then the expansion of the national security state tends to go in one direction; it's not any different to the use of domestic wiretaps of civil rights organisers by the FBI under JFK.


Which in no way obviates Obama from refraining from the practice. The "everybody else did it" justification is very first grade-ish.

No US president is going to investigate putative war crimes that may have been committed by his predecessor or by American troops. The most that might happen is a few token trials of individual soldiers for specific actions without any recognition that those actions were due to any official policy.


I seem to recall soldiers in Vietnam being tried for waterboarding Vietnamese back in the 60s, so this is simply not true. I am sorry, so very sorry, that Obama is a moral coward on this issue, as he opens the way for more and worse abuses in the future.

"Fraud" is by and large an overstatement. There was a lot of money lost in questionable investments in the financial crisis; the actions that led to that money being lost were all perfectly legal thanks to deregulation of the financial sector.


A number of financial reporters such as Matt Taibbi beg to differ. Also, when individual states' AGs began criminal investigations, the Obama "Justice" department did everything in its power to thwart them, and persuade them to take civil settlements instead.

Because not ensuring liquidity and the overall stability of the banking system would be a much better option.


In Iceland, they refused to bail out the banks, and they prosecuted the bankers. Their economy seems to be coming along swimmingly. Currently, the top 25 banks (assets $11 trillion) are sitting on "derivatives" (wild ass bets) equal to $233 trillion. Are we to pay for that when it blows up as well?

You know who FDR appointed to head the Securities and Exchange Commission? Joe Kennedy.


You have a point there. It takes a thief to catch a thief. Trouble is, Geitner, et al, don't want to catch anyone or reform the system. Somehow, FDR got reform with Joe Kennedy.

The votes weren't there for single payer, and the ACA was the best option available. Sometimes you have to be a pragmatic incrementalist.


And Obama made ZERO attempts to fight for it when he had the political capital. Also, once you invite the insurance industry to write the law, you can be DAMNED sure the votes won't be there since "single payer" won't be there.

It's great that you've reconsidered your position, although considering the state of American politics generally, I would seriously have to ask you: do you have any viable options?


No.

And we never will as long as "pragmatists" keep telling us it can't be done.

OK, you have the vote. May I suggest you quit while you are ahead?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Kelvin Mace (Reply #323)

Sat Sep 22, 2012, 06:17 PM

374. And your response is fairly inadequate, really

Actually, what he has to do is simple: Nothing. He needs to STOP appealing court decisions that say he does not have the right to hold people forever without trial. He is fighting to keep people at Guantanamo. All I ask that he do is STOP THAT. Take the court ruling and say, well, the judge said we (actually Bush) were wrong.


Military commissions aren't civilian trials but they take the place of them under the law we have. Indefinite detention as such is authorised under the National Defense Authorization Act:

Subtitle D—Counterterrorism
SEC. 1021. AFFIRMATION OF AUTHORITY OF THE ARMED FORCES OF
THE UNITED STATES TO DETAIN COVERED PERSONS
PURSUANT TO THE AUTHORIZATION FOR USE OF MILITARY
FORCE.
(a) IN GENERAL.—Congress affirms that the authority of the
President to use all necessary and appropriate force pursuant to
the Authorization for Use of Military Force (Public Law 107–40;
50 U.S.C. 1541 note) includes the authority for the Armed Forces
of the United States to detain covered persons (as defined in subsection
(b)) pending disposition under the law of war.
(b) COVERED PERSONS.—A covered person under this section
is any person as follows:
(1) A person who planned, authorized, committed, or aided
the terrorist attacks that occurred on September 11, 2001,
or harbored those responsible for those attacks.
(2) A person who was a part of or substantially supported
al-Qaeda, the Taliban, or associated forces that are engaged
in hostilities against the United States or its coalition partners,
including any person who has committed a belligerent act or
has directly supported such hostilities in aid of such enemy
forces.
(c) DISPOSITION UNDER LAW OF WAR.—The disposition of a
person under the law of war as described in subsection (a) may
include the following:
(1) Detention under the law of war without trial until
the end of the hostilities authorized by the Authorization for
Use of Military Force.
(2) Trial under chapter 47A of title 10, United States
Code (as amended by the Military Commissions Act of 2009
(title XVIII of Public Law 111–84)).



see here: http://www.gpo.gov/fdsys/pkg/BILLS-112hr1540enr/pdf/BILLS-112hr1540enr.pdf

Note that the authorisation of indefinite detention is "pursuant to the laws of war" and such persons deemed to be enemy combatants are detained until cessation of hostilities. This is an altogether normal procedure for prisoners of war. If you accept that the US is "at war" with Al Qaeda then these provisions are perfectly standard. (And US citizens who take up arms against the US are probably luckier to be treated as enemy combatants considering that the penalty for treason is still death.) The distinction seems to mostly be in the argument of whether one accepts that the US is "at war" with Al Qaeda, and whether Al Qaeda operatives should be treated as prisoners of war, or as common criminals. The US government at present maintains the former postion, and all of the laws passed by the US Congress relating to detention of enemy combatants re the war on terror adhere to that view as well. It's an unfortunate political reality but it is nonetheless a political reality. Would I like to see it changed? Yes; do I think it will be? Not unless the votes magically appear in Congress to repeal the existing detention laws.

And the argument for drones is not Nuremberg; it's Dresden. Or Hamburg. Legitimate military targets; collateral damage. Unfortunate, but an action that nonetheless materially injures the enemy's capacity to wage war. Targeted execution of Al Qaeda fighters by drone strikes is if anything considerably less deadly than the WWII mass bombings.

And your example of "soldiers in Vietnam being tried for waterboarding" just proves my point. Show trials. One or two examples. Few bad apples, that's all, it's not the whole system that's rotten, nothing to see here, move along.

Re Iceland: I would like to invite you to compare the relative size of the financial sector in Iceland and in the US. And the average level of individual debt in Iceland and the US. Iceland's recovery has more to do with an amnesty for private debts, which were officially retired, than it does with letting the banks fail. Iceland's economy contracted by 10% due to the economic crisis, and it hasn't yet recovered to 2007 levels. The US economic contraction, in terms of GDP? 3%. The difference? Quantitative easing. And Iceland has fewer people than a medium-sized US city. You can't really compare what works economically in a country with three hundred thousand people to what would work in a country of three hundred million with a vastly more diversified economy and significantly higher levels of personal debt.

Re healthcare, political capital doesn't translate into votes. Were the votes ever there for single payer? No, they were not. Are you old enough to remember Clinton's healthcare reform? I am. Do you know how that turned out? It didn't.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Spider Jerusalem (Reply #374)

Sat Sep 22, 2012, 06:23 PM

375. Again, you got the vote for your guy

 

Why do you insist on arguing the issue?

Given your sig line, your response to my post is rather rich.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Spider Jerusalem (Reply #51)

Sat Sep 22, 2012, 04:43 PM

365. So basically you have just given up on all these issues. You have rationalized everything

that has helped towards the detioration ofthis country and are now saying we should never even try to, eg, get War and Economic Criminals prosecuted!

Who said 'no president is ever going to prosecute War criminals'?? Do you actually accept this as a US policy?

You know that the victims do not go away and that they are extremely active all over the world attempting to get the justice they deserve. And if the US fails to do its duty, then someone outside of the US will do it for us.

The lesser of two evils may not be what you want but it's better than the alternative.


You are actually promoting the 'lesser of two evils'???

Sorry, I do not, and apparently neither do an awful lot of people, share your pessimistic view of this country. What a sad post, honestly. To just give up and let the criminals off the hook. If I believed what you just wrote, which I do not, I would leave this country and go somewhere else.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to sabrina 1 (Reply #365)

Sat Sep 22, 2012, 06:30 PM

377. Being realistic doesn't mean "giving up"

and I think it's profoundly unrealistic to assume that any American president would endorse the trial of one of his predecessors for war crimes, which seems to be what's being advocated. Sending Bush to the Hague for the Iraq war sets a precedent that no American president regardless of policy is going to tolerate; that's a simple fact.

Other simple facts: a president is not an omnipotent god-emperor; he is constrained in action by the Constitution, by the Congress, and by the inertia of policies put in place and set in motion before he took office. If you want a good example of that look at LBJ and Vietnam; the "domino theory" and escalation of US involvement was the policy of JFK's national security team, the "best and brightest", Macnamara and Bundy, and Johnson was dragged along by the tide of events beyond his control. Or for that matter look at JFK and the Bay of Pigs (a product of the Eisenhower CIA).

I don't really think that having an awareness of political realities and the actual workings of government, and the limits they place on any president's sphere of action, is pessimistic at all. Cynical, perhaps, but not pessimistic (there's a difference).

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Spider Jerusalem (Reply #377)

Sat Sep 22, 2012, 07:13 PM

379. But none of this stopped the Republicans when THEY decided to prosecute a US President

NOT for War Crimes, true, but for having an affair. Why is they never worry about what anyone else thinks? The got Clinton impeached, and nearly convicted.

And Congress did go after Nixon also, had he not resigned, he most likely would have been impeached.

Everything you say may have become true, and that is all the more reason to change it. Nothing could be worse imho, than to be a country that knowingly allows War Criminals go unpunished. We have lost the moral authority to be able to be what we once claimed to be, the example to others on Human Rights. Now, whenever the US points a finger at other nasty, abusive regimes, someone, such as China eg, responds by listing the crimes of the Bush administration and tells us to clean up our own mess before telling anyone else what to do.

This weakens a country, losing the respect of the rest of the world. So, if it is true that it is policy to refuse to punish law breakers now, then it is even more imperative to start changing that.

'No one is above the law'. I believe that. What we need is a Congress filled with members who also believe it.

Edited to ask, as others have pointed out your sigline, but do you believe that sigline? I know I do but your posts in this thread seem to contradict it completely.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Spider Jerusalem (Reply #51)

Sat Sep 22, 2012, 09:24 PM

403. I Understand That...

...you believe that Obama did not campaign as a "Progressive." I would take considerable issue with that. How anybody can watch and listen to his campaign speeches and not conclude that he was coming from a Progressive point of view is completely baffling to me. As a Biden supporter, I remember telling my wife during the campaign that Obama was laying out progressive goals that I didn't feel he was going to be able to achieve. As time went on, I actually began to believe in what he was saying...hope and change started to mean something to me. Maybe he is the real thing. I not only became a big supporter of President Obama, I actually started believing that he could pull it off. I am a Democrat...(now known as a Progressive, I guess). I know when I hear "progressive" speeches...I was not in denial and I didn't hear only what I wanted to hear. He campaigned as a Progressive and has governed as a moderate.

-PLA

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Kelvin Mace (Original post)

Fri Sep 21, 2012, 08:17 PM

63. I'm a Union Guy

 

and I deal with your type of frustration in my ranks all the time, every day.

This is a "choice" election, as so many others are.

The choice is between a candidate (and a party) that all too frequently, disappoints us. On the other hand, the choice of the alternative candidate and party are people who have made it their political ambition to destroy us.

To me the choice is clear. I will never, ever make the awful decision of making the perfect the enemy of the good.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Kelvin Mace (Original post)

Fri Sep 21, 2012, 08:22 PM

64. Whatever, take your tripe and faux outrage somewhere else.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Pisces (Reply #64)

Fri Sep 21, 2012, 09:29 PM

88. I shall post what I wish, when I wish, and how I wish

 

I was not rude to you, why do you feel the right to be rude to me?

If my posts upset you so, you have tools at your disposal which allow you never to see my name again.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Kelvin Mace (Reply #88)

Fri Sep 21, 2012, 10:38 PM

107. And occassionally you might get away with it due to the jury system

However, please don't try to claim that you are in accordance with the TOS.

Vote for Democrats.
Winning elections is important — therefore, advocating in favor of Republican nominees or in favor of third-party spoiler candidates that could split the vote and throw an election to our conservative opponents is never permitted on Democratic Underground. But that does not mean that DU members are required to always be completely supportive of Democrats. During the ups-and-downs of politics and policy-making, it is perfectly normal to have mixed feelings about the Democratic officials we worked hard to help elect. When we are not in the heat of election season, members are permitted to post strong criticism or disappointment with our Democratic elected officials, or to express ambivalence about voting for them. In Democratic primaries, members may support whomever they choose. But when general election season begins, DU members must support Democratic nominees (EXCEPT in rare cases where were a non-Democrat is most likely to defeat the conservative alternative, or where there is no possibility of splitting the liberal vote and inadvertently throwing the election to the conservative alternative). For presidential contests, election season begins when both major-party nominees become clear. For non-presidential contests, election season begins on Labor Day. Everyone here on DU needs to work together to elect more Democrats and fewer Republicans to all levels of American government. If you are bashing, trashing, undermining, or depressing turnout for our candidates during election season, we'll assume you are rooting for the other side.
(emphasis mine)

So the time for you to post this garbage is well past. So if you can't comply with the TOS, you might be better off posting this shit on another forum. You might call this being rude, I call it complying with the rules, which I don't think is too much to ask.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Major Nikon (Reply #107)

Sat Sep 22, 2012, 12:55 AM

131. I am not in violation of the TOS

 

The whole point of this post is to make the argument by which people who have major objections to Obama can ethically and morally vote for him.

At NO point have I told ANYONE not to vote for him. In fact, I have gone OUT OF MY WAY to explain that people have the right to vote FOR him.

Also, I have made it quite plain that I intend to vote for other LIBERAL candidates down ballot (I do not consider Democrat synonymous with liberal) Sorry, but I refuse to vote for Joe Lieberman types just because they stick a "D" after their name.

READ what I say, not what you want to think I say.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Kelvin Mace (Reply #131)

Sat Sep 22, 2012, 01:10 AM

139. Please don't piss on my shoes and tell me it's raining

I read your soapbox rant and you were very clearly bashing Obama, which definitely is a violation of the TOS during election season to anyone who is reasonably literate.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Kelvin Mace (Reply #131)

Sat Sep 22, 2012, 02:19 PM

319. sure thing pal.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Major Nikon (Reply #107)

Sat Sep 22, 2012, 04:21 AM

165. +1000!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Pisces (Reply #64)

Fri Sep 21, 2012, 11:40 PM

117. You know what, fuck that response.

(not fuck you, but big time fuck your response)

We all know, including the OP, that Obama has to win and that Rmoney is one of the most unbelievably irretrievably horrible people to ever run for the White House. The OP is voting Obama, I'm voting Obama, you're voting Obama. But fuck this nonsense where people are told that they can't have problems with this administration, where they're told to shut up and go elsewhere. Fuck that a million times. That is the most toxic, undemocratic and anti-Democratic attitude possible and it happens far, far too often. This OP is not some troll, and neither is anyone else here who is voting for Obama but doesn't like some of the things that have gone down. Half of you are acting like, if you aren't voting with a smile while whistling "America, Fuck Yeah!" then you're just a no-good crybaby who wants a dictator. The dismissiveness and arrogance of that approach to people here is pathetic.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Union Scribe (Reply #117)

Sat Sep 22, 2012, 01:00 AM

133. I am greatful some folks understand

 

what I am saying.

Jeebus, you give people what they want and they still aren't happy.

Thanks for your forceful defense of principle.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Union Scribe (Reply #117)

Sat Sep 22, 2012, 01:15 AM

141. Fuck your response too

If you have a problem with this administration, the time to air that is prior to the nomination. If someone can't hold their tongue for the 2 months between the convention and the election, they should find another forum where such things are NOT in violation of the terms they agreed to when they signed up.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Major Nikon (Reply #141)

Sat Sep 22, 2012, 01:22 AM

145. If it were a violation, I would be gone

 

Not my first rodeo as the man said.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Kelvin Mace (Reply #145)

Sat Sep 22, 2012, 01:35 AM

150. Not sure how you figure that

DU3 means community standards are enforced through the jury system. So as long as you can rely on DU jurors' basic ignorance of the TOS and you can thinly veil your bashing within your rhetoric, there's no reason to suspect you can't continue. However, I'd be surprised if you weren't on the radar right now. I'm not going to do it, but I suspect a few have already passed messages on to MIRT about it.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Major Nikon (Reply #141)

Sat Sep 22, 2012, 04:29 AM

168. How is the OP violating the TOS? Is there some rule saying that valid concerns can't be raised

during the two months prior to the election? Why not support the discussion and help the OP see your POV and take it as an opportunity to educate or talk through the issues rather than attempt to supress valid concerns from those within your party?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to IndyJones (Reply #168)

Sat Sep 22, 2012, 05:43 AM

174. Do I need to draw you a picture?

If you are bashing, trashing, undermining, or depressing turnout for our candidates during election season, we'll assume you are rooting for the other side.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Major Nikon (Reply #174)

Sat Sep 22, 2012, 06:54 AM

202. He is doing none of those

If I were on the jury, his post would stand.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to tavalon (Reply #202)

Sat Sep 22, 2012, 07:11 AM

210. So you want to piss on my other shoe and tell me it's raining also

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Major Nikon (Reply #210)

Sat Sep 22, 2012, 07:39 AM

226. I've got no interest in your shoes,

and quite a bit less in this back and forth with you.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to tavalon (Reply #226)

Sat Sep 22, 2012, 12:23 PM

286. Bravo!

Cheers!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Major Nikon (Reply #174)

Mon Sep 24, 2012, 03:43 AM

448. How about the people telling him not to vote for Obama?

The ones yelling that they don't want his vote? That he should "keep it"? Those are explicit violations of the TOS, far worse than anything the OP wrote. Are you kicking up dust about them, too?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Union Scribe (Reply #448)

Mon Sep 24, 2012, 04:59 AM

451. I call 'em as I see 'em

If you find something worse, point it out. Looks like you already did.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Major Nikon (Reply #141)

Sat Sep 22, 2012, 08:17 AM

234. I love how some here have been resorting to the old

 

"STFDASTFU" rejoinder. I'd like to welcome the rest of the progressive world to what we in the LGBT*.* community have been experiencing since 5 minutes after Obama was elected.

We don't win by further fracturing our base, we win by bringing people together. We don't win by demanding blind obedience and loyalty unto death, we win by making our case and convincing those that are wavering.

If you're going to tell a Democrat to hold their tongue then you might as well cross the aisle because that's the side of the debate that blind obedience belongs on.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Pab Sungenis (Reply #234)

Sat Sep 22, 2012, 08:23 AM

237. I love those who keep trying desperately to make this into something it isn't

If you want to bash Obama, feel free to do it outside of the election season. That's what the TOS says and it just isn't that hard to figure out nor is it a bad idea regardless of what you think.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Major Nikon (Reply #237)

Sat Sep 22, 2012, 08:26 AM

239. There's so much love between you two!

 

You should really get together some time.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Major Nikon (Reply #237)

Sat Sep 22, 2012, 08:38 AM

242. Criticism is not bashing.

 

I've said before I'm voting for Obama. I won't donate to him or work the phones for his campaign, but I'm voting for him and encourage others to do so because the alternative is worse.

If I really thought that Romney was better I would have logged off this board and gone to work for his campaign. Instead, I'm holding my nose to vote for a Democratic President who I have major problems with. I'm also working downticket races that are perhaps more important than the Presidency this time around.

Stop demanding purity and start accepting begrudging support. That's how elections are won.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Kelvin Mace (Original post)

Fri Sep 21, 2012, 08:27 PM

65. I'm going to say to you what I said to my friend who tried (like you) to keep me from voting Obama

Would you rather have Romney and the Fuckpublicans running things? I'm PRO-Democracy, not PRO-Obama.



Your negativism simply sucks. It doesn't belong here, maybe you'll have a friendlier audience where they hate Obama, like the 34% who think he wasn't born here, try that block of cretins.


You fucking insult me. 10 years here, and this shit still gets posted.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to DainBramaged (Reply #65)

Fri Sep 21, 2012, 08:33 PM

68. You'd look smarter if you actually read the entire OP

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to DisgustipatedinCA (Reply #68)

Fri Sep 21, 2012, 09:06 PM

76. You'd look smarter if you minded your own business

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to DainBramaged (Reply #76)

Fri Sep 21, 2012, 09:26 PM

86. Still can't read yet, huh?



RL

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to RetroLounge (Reply #86)

Fri Sep 21, 2012, 10:39 PM

108. Pot shots, still trying aren't ya?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to DainBramaged (Reply #108)

Sat Sep 22, 2012, 12:13 PM

279. I love when someone obviously did not read the entire OP and then gets offended

when their lack of reading comprehension is pointed out, so they double down and look even more unhinged.

pot shot?



RL

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to RetroLounge (Reply #279)

Sat Sep 22, 2012, 04:14 PM

356. I did, I STILL got offended

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to DisgustipatedinCA (Reply #68)

Sat Sep 22, 2012, 06:55 AM

203. Thank you for saving me the trouble

Reading Comprehension 101.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to tavalon (Reply #203)

Sat Sep 22, 2012, 04:28 PM

359. Is this fucking pile on 101, Go Merrry Christmas your tree

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to DainBramaged (Reply #65)

Fri Sep 21, 2012, 09:33 PM

89. I am sorry you feel insulted

 

No, I would not rather have Romney, and I wish people would come up with a more nuanced argument than "if you are not for me, you are against me."

I have been here almost as long as you, and I still read stuff I disagree with.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Kelvin Mace (Reply #89)

Fri Sep 21, 2012, 10:46 PM

109. It has NOTING to do with for me/against me holy shit

This is the election which could mean the beginning of the end of the Conservative Supreme Court for a generation, and you want us to say, nah, not Obama, he's the one who bailed out wall street while the housing market went to shit, or prosecuted those of us who smoke medical marijuana, or a hundred other broken promises.


You run with what ya brung son, and if you don't like the choice, go vote for the other guy. Or sit home on your hands.


We're done here.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to DainBramaged (Reply #109)

Sat Sep 22, 2012, 01:03 AM

134. The SCOTUS is a lost cause for the next 20 years

 

That ship sailed in 2005-2006.

Also, what part of "I wasn't going to be able to vote for Obama, but now I can" is pissing you off so much? Do you think I am the only person on this board who feels this way?

Do you want the votes or don't you?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to DainBramaged (Reply #65)

Fri Sep 21, 2012, 10:05 PM

101. Seems like you posted without reading the original post. nt.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to limpyhobbler (Reply #101)

Sat Sep 22, 2012, 06:57 AM

204. Many, many did.

I usually think of DUers as being of above average intelligence. Some days it becomes harder to believe that.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Kelvin Mace (Original post)

Fri Sep 21, 2012, 08:33 PM

69. Perhaps I'm being too simplistic, but it's a 2 party system.

I don't get this "good conscience" stuff. There are two candidates. You vote for the one out of the two you like better. It is highly improbable that you will agree with the guy you vote for on every issue, but if you don't vote for him, you are helping the other guy. So you should vote for the guy you agree with on more stuff than the other guy.

Or am I dumbing this down too much?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Nye Bevan (Reply #69)

Fri Sep 21, 2012, 08:42 PM

73. Only by default. It was not originally designed to work this way.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Nye Bevan (Reply #69)

Fri Sep 21, 2012, 09:39 PM

91. Black and white choices for a grey world

 

The devil you know, is still the devil.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Nye Bevan (Reply #69)

Fri Sep 21, 2012, 10:22 PM

103. That is simplifying it a little maybe.

Some people think things keep getting worse with choosing the lesser of two evils.

For those people, they have to ask themselves "how long are we going to keep doing this?" How long can we keep choosing between two parties that agree on so many important issues, when things keep getting worse, and both parties are committed to implementing slightly different versions of the same policies? Why are there so many urgent issues that are not discussed at all in mainstream politics.

If someone is really convinced that both the Democrats and Republicans will screw the people, one slightly worse than the other, at some point it could make sense to start working outside the two-party system. This could be to try to scare one of the two major parties into representing those issues better.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Nye Bevan (Reply #69)

Sat Sep 22, 2012, 01:25 AM

147. I've always looked at it that way, too.

There doesn't seem to be much other choice in this system. The odds are pretty small of any candidate mirroring my beliefs on every issue, or anyone else's. Until they come up with a system to please 100% of us, I vote for the best of the two and work to change public opinion on the issues that matter most to me. Public opinion drives politicians, not the other way around.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Nye Bevan (Reply #69)

Sat Sep 22, 2012, 06:58 AM

205. No, actually, you've just made a fine argument

for convening a Constitutional Convention. It's well past time to dismantle this two party lock system.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Kelvin Mace (Original post)

Fri Sep 21, 2012, 08:39 PM

71. So, you're going to vote for Obama in spite of yourself.

OK. As long as you vote for Obama, that's just fine.

I have to say, though, that you're missing some important points here. But, I won't trouble you any further with those. As long as you're voting for Obama for whatever reason, I can't argue against that, for sure.

I'm really not sure, though, what this is in aid of.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to MineralMan (Reply #71)

Fri Sep 21, 2012, 09:41 PM

92. I am hardly the only person with problems voting for Obama

 

I have seen some very nasty and heated arguments over the issue, and have seen people leave as well.

My point is to offer those people who share my objections an ethical solution to a problem that bothers them more than it obviously bothers other people.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to MineralMan (Reply #71)

Sat Sep 22, 2012, 07:06 AM

206. It is in aid of those of us who couldn't, when the chips were down,

go pragmatic. I have, and a tiny piece of my soul is the gold I pay for that. I've already done it, so it's too late for me. But for others who were going to sit it out because their idealism (boy, do I know that idealism intimately) just couldn't allow them to vote for another four years that might be just like the last four years, he gives them a patriotic out. Lend a hand to the disenfranchised.

Simple, elegant and beautiful. And since I seem to be the only person on this website who remembers exactly who this David Allen is and how damn patriotic he is, I'm not at all surprised that this is the solution he came up with for himself and offers to others.

I would have loved to have seen this three months ago. I haven't found a way yet to buy back the little pieces of my soul that this life requires. This could have saved me yet another piece.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Kelvin Mace (Original post)

Fri Sep 21, 2012, 08:40 PM

72. I respect your choice and reasoning. Peace, brother!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to GreenPartyVoter (Reply #72)

Fri Sep 21, 2012, 09:42 PM

93. Thank you

 

I think you are about one of four people who seem to get what I am trying to do.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Kelvin Mace (Reply #93)

Sat Sep 22, 2012, 07:07 AM

207. Five

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to tavalon (Reply #207)

Mon Oct 1, 2012, 12:33 PM

533. six

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Kelvin Mace (Reply #93)

Sat Sep 22, 2012, 07:57 AM

229. I get it.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Kelvin Mace (Original post)

Fri Sep 21, 2012, 09:43 PM

94. OBAMA/BIDEN 2012!!!!!

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Kelvin Mace (Original post)

Fri Sep 21, 2012, 09:48 PM

96. You live in the USA what do you expect

Just vote for Obama or stay at home you have the choice

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Rosa Luxemburg (Reply #96)

Sat Sep 22, 2012, 01:04 AM

135. No, my choice was still voting

 

just not in the presidential race.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Kelvin Mace (Original post)

Fri Sep 21, 2012, 09:49 PM

97. I hear what you're saying, but I hope you vote for the president.

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Kelvin Mace (Original post)

Fri Sep 21, 2012, 09:49 PM

98. well it's mighty big of you- voting for someone else- but...

THAT'S NOT WHAT A VOTE IS ABOUT!!!!

Your vote is YOURS- vote for yourself.

(and- i don't give a f*ck who you vote for- it's none of my damned business.)

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Kelvin Mace (Original post)

Fri Sep 21, 2012, 09:58 PM

100. I was never behind Obama nor Hillary for that matter. I knew he was a conserva-Dem,

as is Hillary, which is why I originally supported Dennis Kucinich and then John Edwards. I'm not at all disappointed in what his policies are because it's what I expected. However, setting all that aside, the crucial issue in this election is the appointment of future Supreme Court judges. In that respect I am confident he will make the right choices. Otherwise I will eat my words if his second term is any different from his first and he starts channeling FDR.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Kelvin Mace (Original post)

Fri Sep 21, 2012, 10:16 PM

102. is your right

to have your own ideas ...we all learn from eachother

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Kelvin Mace (Original post)

Fri Sep 21, 2012, 10:27 PM

105. How many more like Scalia and Thomas as SCOTUS would you recommend?

...that's the choice. Everything else pales. It's for their lives...and they all live a very long time. (Good health care, and all)

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to cr8tvlde (Reply #105)

Sat Sep 22, 2012, 08:25 AM

238. How many more Elena Kagans would YOU recommend?

 

Anti-4th-Amendment, anti-gay. This is supposedly a DEMOCRAT we're talking about, replacing one of the Court's liberal bastions and the most solidly pro-civil rights Justices since Thurgood Marshall.

I reconciled myself to there being no hope of saving the Court the day the Senate confirmed Kagan. And I have no evidence that Obama will nominate anyone better to replace Ginsburg and Breyer next term. We know that Scalia and Thomas won't retire while Obama is in office so he will never have a chance to replace a conservative and he's shown twice now that he won't replace a liberal with another liberal.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Kelvin Mace (Original post)

Fri Sep 21, 2012, 10:52 PM

110. Terms of Service : when general election season begins, DU members must support Democratic nominees

 

That's a quote.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to WinkyDink (Reply #110)

Fri Sep 21, 2012, 10:57 PM

111. People don't give a shit, they think it's OK and spew with impunity

while silly shit gets people alerted on.

Fucking double standard

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to DainBramaged (Reply #111)

Fri Sep 21, 2012, 11:50 PM

120. Chill out, bud.

The OP stated quite clearly that he would cast a vote for Obama. What is it about that you don't get?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to 99Forever (Reply #120)

Sat Sep 22, 2012, 01:23 AM

146. Apparently,

 

I am supposed to dance the Macarena while doing so.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Kelvin Mace (Reply #146)

Sat Sep 22, 2012, 01:47 AM

153. NO. YOu're supposed to pull your head out of the sand.

Have you been alive with clear ears and eyes for the last fore years? Aim your outrage at republicans.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to bluestate10 (Reply #153)

Sat Sep 22, 2012, 01:30 PM

308. Hmmm...

 

Dems doing what Republicans did, but that is OK, just blame Republicans and ignore Democrats violations of the law.

Gotcha!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to 99Forever (Reply #120)

Sat Sep 22, 2012, 04:35 PM

363. I'm not your bud, chill this

it's shit stirring plain and simple. Just like any Draconian Puke trick before any election, it's shit stirring to make an overly inflated ego explode.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to DainBramaged (Reply #111)

Sat Sep 22, 2012, 02:04 AM

155. This shit did get alerted on

I knew it already had been, but I alerted again just to see what the jury came up with and it was 2-4. I guess not enough people bother to actually read the TOS or like you say all anyone seems to give a shit about is hiding posts that have PG sexual innuendo while garbage like this stands. Might as well hang out in freeperland.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Major Nikon (Reply #155)

Sat Sep 22, 2012, 04:07 AM

162. Or, maybe they aren't all eager to become

such a desolate and lifeless echo chamber that even an Obama voter would be silenced for not being 100% enamored of his policies. It is a shitty and cold forum you desire.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Union Scribe (Reply #162)

Sat Sep 22, 2012, 05:36 AM

173. I don't have a problem with it

The thousands of people here who actually are complying with the rules don't seem to have a problem with it. If the Obama bashers can't stand the thought of "a shitty and cold forum" for 2 months, then go somewhere else. It's not that complicated.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Major Nikon (Reply #173)

Sat Sep 22, 2012, 08:33 AM

240. So now those of us who don't like Obama but are supporting him anyway aren't welcome?

 

I think a post like the OP makes a much more convincing case for "hold your nose and vote" than telling someone who is supporting you with reservations to go somewhere else.

The Obama Administration has been disastrous for civil liberties, has advanced the cause of corporate conglomerates over the needs of the average person, and has further entrenched the war in Afghanistan rather than end it the way it should have been in July of 2009.

The simple truth is, however, that the alternative would be much worse and many of us are voting for Obama solely because we know things would be worse with Romney in the Oval. A good number of us are contributing to and volunteering for local and Congressional candidates as well. Would you rather that we stop those efforts and go away just because we don't agree with your perception that Obama is perfect and anyone who criticizes him is evil? That's how we lost in 2010: the liberals stayed home. Don't flush the 2012 Congressional races the same way.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Pab Sungenis (Reply #240)

Sat Sep 22, 2012, 08:39 AM

244. I think you're right on your first point but wrong on the others.

 

The 'disastrous on civil liberties' part especially does not ring true for me.

But I think you have the right to point out the way you see it.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to randome (Reply #244)

Sat Sep 22, 2012, 08:56 AM

247. "The 'disastrous on civil liberties' part especially does not ring true for me."

 

Keeping Guantanamo open, renewing the Patriot Act, not only keeping but expanding Bush's warrantless wiretap policy? Indefinite Preventive Detention?

The difference is that Romney would end up doubling and tripling down on Obama's doubling down on Bush's policies. By re-electing Obama we can at least hope that things won't get worse than they are.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to randome (Reply #244)

Sat Sep 22, 2012, 01:33 PM

309. Legalizing domestic spying

 

Ignoring Habeus, life imprisonment without trial, trial by military tribunal, these are NOT civil liberty disasters to you?

They were when Bush was doing it.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Kelvin Mace (Reply #309)

Sat Sep 22, 2012, 01:48 PM

314. All things that need to be addressed.

 

On the other side of the coin are:
Supporting same-sex marriage.
Ending the war in Iraq.
Helping foster the Arab Spring.
Advocating for more equatable taxation policies.

Your list of negatives would have more resonance, I suspect, if you also mentioned positive things to congratulate the administration on.

I just don't see it as a philosophical toss-up between Obama and Romney. Keep up the fight to right the wrongs you mentioned but also recognize the administration for the right things they have done.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Pab Sungenis (Reply #240)

Sat Sep 22, 2012, 08:42 AM

245. Once again you pretend this is something it's not

If you think 'I can't in good conscience vote for Obama' 'but I'm going to anyway' makes sense, then I'm not sure we have much to discuss and since you have to make false accusations and put words in my mouth to make your arguments, I have zero interest in doing so. Furthermore I'm not going to keep responding just so you can use it as an excuse to post more Obama bashing bullshit. I'm just going to invite you to find another playmate.

Cheers!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Major Nikon (Reply #245)

Sat Sep 22, 2012, 09:47 AM

258. "You pretend this is something it's not"

 

then go somewhere else. It's not that complicated.


How is this anything other than telling reluctant supporters to get lost?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Major Nikon (Reply #155)

Sat Sep 22, 2012, 07:10 AM

209. Hmmm, calling out a fellow member

I think that's a violation of the TOS. But then, there's been a lot of that on this thread, so I'm inclined to let yours slide.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to tavalon (Reply #209)

Sat Sep 22, 2012, 07:25 AM

220. So where does it say that, exactly?

And assuming you can find this (which I have no confidence you can), what exactly do you think a call out is?

Your objectivity on this subject isn't impressing me.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Major Nikon (Reply #220)

Sat Sep 22, 2012, 07:36 AM

225. I'm heading to bed in a few minutes so I'm not going to comb through now

When I get up, if I still have an irk in my belly around your game, I'll find it. You called him a troll. Not directly. And, while I have alerted on one post in this whole thread, yours was not the lucky one. I don't care enough about the game you're playing to bother.

I'm not objective on this subject! I had to hand over a piece of my soul to pragmata. That fucking hurts. I would have jumped on this as a way not to have done that if it had been posted a few months ago. I'm grateful to David Allen, a man I've considered a hero for years (I consider Skinner a hero, too) for putting this out there, now, when it is coming down to the wire. Too late for me, but he's convinced at least two other people to use this method to be able to vote for Obama without a sell out.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to tavalon (Reply #225)

Sat Sep 22, 2012, 08:17 AM

233. The TOS takes up one page

If you haven't found it already, you ain't gonna find it. So now you want to pull something else right out of your ass and make false accusations of troll calling to support your non-objective BS.

I've had as much of this as I'm going to take. I don't try to reason with people who are clearly unreasonable and as you have far exceeded my quota for absurdity, I'm going to have to invite you to find a new playmate because I have zero interest in continuing this discussion with you. Feel free to have the last word if such things are important to you, but I won't be reading it and I won't be responding.

Cheers!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Major Nikon (Reply #233)

Sat Sep 22, 2012, 07:37 PM

395. Considering that I went to bed just a bit after speaking to you

and woke up just about 30 minutes ago, I actually haven't looked it up, and I find I don't care enough about your POV to bother. You know what you did.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to tavalon (Reply #209)

Sat Sep 22, 2012, 08:16 AM

232. Provide a link or a quote.

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Major Nikon (Reply #155)

Sat Sep 22, 2012, 09:11 AM

249. MN, I agree with a lot of what you say, but I think the best reaction to this OP is...

 

"Thank you for deciding to vote for Obama and giving some of those folks who rightly or wrongly feel disappointed with Obama another reason to vote for him and lets save our disagreements for after the horror that is Romney/Ryan is defeated."

I get what you are saying and I disagree with most if not all of the reasons to be unhappy with Obama from a Liberal perspective, but if these folks are going to pull the lever for us, I say lets hash all that out after election day.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to stevenleser (Reply #249)

Sat Sep 22, 2012, 01:48 PM

315. If you are ever in my town

 

(High Point, NC) drop me a line and I'll buy you your favorite beverage.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Major Nikon (Reply #155)

Sat Sep 22, 2012, 11:57 AM

271. They read it

 

They seem to not see the violation you see.

Again, point to one place where I have told people not to vote for Obama. The whole point of the post is that I AM voting for Obama, you just don't like my reason and think that unless I agree with you, I should be banned.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Major Nikon (Reply #155)

Sat Sep 22, 2012, 02:37 PM

322. Or maybe the Jury actually read the OP and understood that Democrats will need

every vote they can get. It's pretty sad when someone actually gives people a reason to vote FOR the president, that there are actually people here who disagree.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to WinkyDink (Reply #110)

Fri Sep 21, 2012, 11:43 PM

119. The OP is voting for him!

Does that mean we have to pretend like there weren't problems with Obama's first term? Am I in violation by saying I DON'T support his free trade policies?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to WinkyDink (Reply #110)

Sat Sep 22, 2012, 01:19 AM

143. Gosh, and what exactly do you think I am doing?

 

You folks don't seem to know how to take "yes" for an answer.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Kelvin Mace (Reply #143)

Sat Sep 22, 2012, 02:47 AM

158. Actually it's the title of the OP that's the problem.

Anyone who doesn't read the OP only knows what the thread says. I personally think it should be changed or removed.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to ohheckyeah (Reply #158)

Sat Sep 22, 2012, 01:28 PM

306. If folks are going to judge the entire post

 

by a headline without actually reading the post, not much I can do.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Kelvin Mace (Reply #306)

Sat Sep 22, 2012, 02:26 PM

320. Yes, there is....

change the title.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Kelvin Mace (Reply #143)

Sat Sep 22, 2012, 08:18 AM

235. There is actually a difference between "support" and your now-disingenuous denial of your premise.

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to WinkyDink (Reply #235)

Sat Sep 22, 2012, 01:41 PM

312. My words are plain

 

I am sorry I haven't made them plain enough.

Bottom line, I'm voting for your guy. If my reasons for doing so piss you off, not my problem.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to WinkyDink (Reply #110)

Sat Sep 22, 2012, 06:54 AM

201. Say what?



Remember this guy?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to WinkyDink (Reply #110)

Sat Sep 22, 2012, 07:09 AM

208. And he just showed people who might not otherwise be able to,

a way to do just that.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to tavalon (Reply #208)

Sat Sep 22, 2012, 08:19 AM

236. Oh, wow. A mentor.

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Kelvin Mace (Original post)

Fri Sep 21, 2012, 11:16 PM

115. Thank you, sir.

You have given me the solution to something that has troubled me deeply.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to 99Forever (Reply #115)

Sat Sep 22, 2012, 01:20 AM

144. Good to hear

 

Some folks in this thread seem to think I am some sort of unique creature in my views.

Thanks!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Kelvin Mace (Original post)

Fri Sep 21, 2012, 11:24 PM

116. You are entitled to say what you want, it is called free speech!

What is the alternative, Romney, who ever moves from being a democrat to vote for that loser, is your choice. Obama is not the better of two evils! He is real and the majority of Americans know that he is on their side.

If I could vote in the US. President Obama will get my vote.

May your rant die really hard!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to akbacchus_BC (Reply #116)

Sat Sep 22, 2012, 07:12 AM

211. I don't know if you've noticed