Fuck Chris Hedges.

[TheWraith]

And along with him, fuck anyone who's stupid enough, dishonest enough, or insane enough to still promote and defend the "there's no difference between the major parties" lie. If Nader 2000 and the claim that there was no difference between Al Gore and George Bush didn't teach you that that is so completely wrong as to need new vocabulary to define HOW wrong it is, then you're hopeless.

The reality is that there's more difference between the major parties today than there has been at any point in the last half century or more. To deny that requires ignoring all practical reality, including everything that has happened over the last year, three years, five, ten. It requires you to ignore DADT, the end of the war in Iraq, the elimination of Bin Laden, the use of civilian trials for terror suspects, the end of torture, Lily Ledbetter, healthcare reform, Wall Street reform, the CFPA, Keystone XL pipeline, and on, and on, and on.

[MineralMan]

6. Uh, Hedges is not running.

That Vermin guy would kick his butt in any primary.

[MineralMan]

3. He's not my type, really.

I think I'll pass on that, and won't pay much attention to him during the rest of the campaign. Sounds like he's made a lousy choice, to me.

[11 Bravo]

4. + a really large number

[MattSh]

5. If you don't like him, don't read him.

Simple solution to your problem, don't you think?

[MineralMan]

9. If that's his choice, he'll be in good company.

Truly. If everyone who reads Chris Hedges voted third party, it wouldn't change the results of the election one bit. They'll need more than a few thousand votes, I'd think.

[rustydog]

18. I agree. Chris Hegeshas a right to voice his opinions, just like you and I

One can listen to them, evaluate them then agree or disagree with them.

[zappaman]

29. and we have the right to say "FUCK CHRIS HEDGES"

when we hear his assinine views.
K & R

[FarLeftFist]

7. I see a HUGE difference between the parties on 90% of the issues.

[Liberal_Stalwart71]

8. There are MAJOR differences between the two major parties, and if people don't see that by now,

then that's on them. The Obama = Bad = Worse Than Bush meme is absolutely ridiculous!!

[onenote]

10. But I read elsewhere on DU that Hedges has a Pulitzer

which apparently makes him above criticism, just like his fellow Pulitzer winners, Charles Krauthammer and Kathleen Parker.

[BlueCaliDem]

14. He is a Pulitzer prize winner

Pulitzer Prize-winning journalist Chris Hedges has filed suit against President Obama and Secretary of Defense Leon Panetta to challenge the legality of the National Defense Authorization Act,

http://www.democracynow.org/2012/1/17/journalist_chris_hedges_sues_obama_admin

I believe he's calling for the circular firing squad and he wants Democrats to snatch defeat out of the jaws of victory.

[onenote]

27. I know he is. And while some of his fans think that it matters, it really doesn't

To say nothing of the fact that his Pulitzer was actually awarded to the "NY Times Staff" not to him personally and that it was for a series of ten articles, one of which he co-wrote with another person.

He may be a good writer but his analytical skills aren't for shit. Apparently he believes (based on cherry picked polls) that it would be simple for President Obama to wave a magic wand and enact a very forward thinking progressive legislative agenda (the details of which are somewhat vague) and since he hasn't, he won't get Hedges vote, which will somehow advance the progressive agenda by helping the election of a republican.

[BlueCaliDem]

34. I wish I could K&R or, at least, had written this post

because you've articulated my sentiments exactly.

Thank you!

[Leopolds Ghost]

94. Wait, opposing the NDAA would be snatching defeat out of victory? Somewhat vague progressive ideal?

WTF has happened to DU?

[BlueCaliDem]

137. You know

darn well that's not what I meant.

Thanks for twisting my words, though.

[BlueCaliDem]

11. There are some who would LOVE to return to that argument

in the hope a Republican will eek out another win against the Democrat.

Republicans in power = profits for the PL.

He's a great journalist, but he's not doing the progressive movement any favors. It's either Obama or it's Romney/Grinch/Santorum, and we need to make a choice between someone who's proven he wants to push this country forward for all and someone who wants 100% Koch-style fascism. And that's the cold, hard reality of our system of government.

[FarLeftFist]

13. Yes, I often wonder who this imaginary progressive strawman is that Obama is compared to.

Especially being that Obama is the most progressive President we've had in just about ever.

[BlueCaliDem]

21. I believe

it's Nader. Or Dennis Kucinich? Or Bernie Sanders? Ron Paul?

I dunno. I guess he's underestimating the power of Congress just as too many do.

Congress is the problem, not the president. NDAA is a Congressional bill, passing with veto-proof majorities, and yes, Obama could've pulled out his veto-pen, but they had the numbers to override it and it would've been an empty gesture with serious implications. Because in the meantime, corporate media can tout how anti-military Obama (wiping out his Obama got Osama, ridding Lybia of Gadhafi, stopping pirates from raiding, taking out 22 top members of al-Qaeda - all in one go) and the GOP can cobble their shredded image of being "strong on defense" back together while Obama is excoriated for delaying pay to our military...but Hedges is going to sue Obama over it?? How about suing those really responsible? Like, I dunno, Congress?

[Enrique]

12. I don't agree with him on that

I also don't agree with your list of examples. I think some of them are ludicrous to make this point. But I won't say "Fuck TheWraith" for posting something I disagree with.

[hobbit709]

15. your privilege.

[surfdog]

16. I agree fuck him

just another idiot telling us the reason we don't have single payer is because the president isn't progressive enough

The idiot completely ignores the fact that Congress is blocking everything

[Leopolds Ghost]

95. It was the president and/or Senate leaders who pushed current anti-progressive legislation

Private insurance mandates, NDAA, SOPA, FISA, etc. etc.

its almost as if they saw it as their job to do a Nixon goes to China and pass bills that would never fly if proposed by Newt in 1994.

[MuseRider]

17. Why? Because he is stating his personal opinion as is his right

as is yours to say this in your thread title?

I love the guy. Does what he says influence me? Only as far as I might look into what he says and then make my own judgement.

Anyone who listens to you or anyone else and bases their opinion solely on what is said as an opinion is an idiot as is anyone who screams when someone does not agree with them.

I don't even know why I am responding to you except to express my exasperation with this kind of thread. Lots of opinions out there, do we have to throw everyone under the bus or scream "fuck you" to anyone who disagrees with us?

[Hugabear]

22. And it's our right to say he can go fuck himself

And yes, anybody who who would possibly help Gingrich, Romney, Santorum, or Paul win in November deserves a huge FUCK YOU

[redqueen]

30. +1

I see what's happening in Canada and I have *no desire* to follow in their footsteps.

[zappaman]

32. Damn, you beat me to it!

K & R

[MuseRider]

41. Read much?

I stated as such in my post. If you want to act like this you certainly have the right but it sure seems like grade school playground here anymore.

Fuck this person, fuck that person and then justifying your vile comments with more comments that are mere personal opinions.

What happened to this place?

Everyone has a right to support whoever they want to and if you feel the need to say fuck you to them then that is your right but it certainly begins at some point to seem that people here don't think others have the right to support someone or something they personally do not like or agree with. A healthy dialog is necessary for democracy and trying to intimidate and throwing fuck you out to everyone you disagree with is not a healthy dialog.

For what it is worth? I tend to agree with Chris so have at it. I feel no need to defend myself to people who merely argue with a big fuck you.

[Hugabear]

48. Forget where you are?

This is DEMOCRATIC Underground. Emphasis on the DEMOCRATIC. That means we don't advocate for 3rd Party candidates - in fact, it's spelled out as part of the Terms of Service. If a regular DUer were to post a thread advocating voting for a 3rd Party - and therefore against Obama and the Democratic Party - they would find themselves tombstoned pretty quickly. But because somebody with a Pulitzer on their resume does so, we're supposed to condone that?

Voting for third-party candidates, while it may be ideologically satisfying, accomplishes nothing except for hurting our party. Realistically, the way our system is set up, third-party candidates have virtually no chance of winning. One of the most "successful" third-party candidates in recent history - Ross Perot in '92 - didn't even win a single electoral vote. So if you want to 'vote your conscience" and go third-party, knock yourself out - but know that you are just hurting our chances of winning, and increasing the chances of a Rethug win.

Sure, in a perfect world, it would be nice if Obama lived up to all of our progressive ideas. And I'll grant that many of us have very valid reasons to be pissed off at some of the stances he's taken. But in the end, he's still our party's nominee, and we should support that.

[MuseRider]

51. Doubt I could forget that since

I have been here since 2002 and am constantly reminded every single time I tell people I am NOT a Democrat or every time I express an opinion that is not popular with the party people.

I don't care what he says about 3rd party, it is his right. Do we really have to act like spoiled little brats about it? Shit we are always concerned about the silencing of people so why do we have to get all pissy when someone does not follow the specific subscribed path of the party? Are you all that worried about other opinions? Does someone disagreeing with you always have to be responded to with something childish?

Different opinions are how we learn and grow. Wanna shut them up? Listen to them and think about what they are saying and then post something that is heartfelt and sincere and see where it goes. Fuck You sounds like a 7 year old when someone steals his special pencil. It seems with a comment like that the last thing you want is for people to be able to express themselves.

If we do not listen to those who are feeling left out, if we do not listen to those who disagree we will not grow and more and more the party will shrink. If saying fuck you loudly and frequently is your solution then go for it but I think it is totally counter productive and isolating the party further from the people who would like to see things change. Change comes from listening, often disagreeing but still listening and incorporating the dissatisfaction of others into our thoughts. Good ideas come from lots of opinions put together, otherwise you are just representing a few and more and more people will leave or say the things you don't apparently want to hear.

[Hugabear]

53. You are 100% correct

It IS his right to express those views. But supporting those views on DU is expressly against TOS.

[MuseRider]

75. Of course it is

and I, and most of us on the outside of the party are acutely aware of that.

Still, why stifle discussion when discussion could perhaps reach a consensus? Not about 3rd party, but anything else eliciting criticism. If anyone writes something that is critical of Obama it is always responded to like this. It is childish, does not help bring people around to your way of thinking. It does not take into account they may have a valid reason for disagreeing and you will never know what that is because that FUCK YOU is actually a shut the fuck up and just pull the D lever. How does that help anything? I see it over and over again. When someone does try to respond calmly and state their case the response is to pile on with a hundred FUCK YOUs. How does that help?

You are actually being quite nice now and I appreciate not being told to shut the fuck up. When people say things like that I usually mark them down as bullies who have no intention of listening or even responding to an actual well meant criticism. They are not worth my time. The people who pile on are usually bullies and cowards, those who like to say that so and so speaks for me. They have no real mind for this, can't make a point but want to be certain that someone knows they are pissed at them and are quite willing to never think any further than to jump in and let someone else speak for them. I see this place becoming like that so often that I do take long breaks from it. But then I miss people I care about and always come back to see if they are still around.

[tallahasseedem]

52. +1

Exactly...

[MFrohike]

85. Unintentional irony

A Che avatar on emphasizing Democratic Underground. I can't quite think of two more dissimilar entities than the Democratic Party and Che Guevara.

[CakeGrrl]

50. +10000

Why do people freak out when critics are criticized in turn?

Taking it too personally because Hedges' view is close to their own?

Anyone who would cast a vote that doesn't HELP the Democratic candidate WIN against any of the GOP contenders? Well...

[MuseRider]

81. Why do people around here

freak out when someone says something they don't like?

The original freak out was the OP.

I don't think anyone here is willing to die defending Hedges but perhaps we feel the need to defend his right to say how he feels even if it does not meet our own requirements.

[killbotfactory]

86. GORE vs. BUSH is the reason.

Some of us are old enough to remember when supposed leftists tried to sell us the "both parties are the same" line of bullshit, some probably even agreed to a large extent and saw no point in calling it out as bullshit.

No one who was conscious during Bush's presidency will make that stupid fucking mistake again.

[MuseRider]

93. Gore won

and none of this would have happened if the Bush** team and the SCOTUS had not stepped in and stopped the recount.

Some of us are old enough to remember when Democrats were liberals.

[stevenleser]

102. What is your position on Nader's election 2000 assertion that Gore = Bush

Since Hedges and Nader and their ilk have been jumping the shark since then, why dont you think they are jumping the shark now?

Simple questions. Lets see if you can answer them directly.

[MuseRider]

112. I agree and I disagree.

Is that good enough to pass your test? Love the black and white thinking here. So this is my answer, gray. It is exactly that, gray.

[leeroysphitz]

58. +1

[TheWraith]

67. Because he is actively attempting to ruin the country, and the world.

That is the net result if we get a Republican win in the Presidency next year. He's not just "stating his opinion." He is propagandizing for the Republicans, trying to portray the election as something other than a choice between the good guys and the enemies of civilization, in the hopes of confusing some low information liberals into believing it's okay to vote third party. If I got up and published an opinion column that was a long winded way of saying that there's no difference between police officers and child molesters, that might be "my opinion" too, but that doesn't make it either somehow automatically valid, or an acceptable opinion to have. To consider it more valid because it's his opinion is, to paraphrase an old quote, to fall prey to the fallacy that democracy means his ignorance is just as good as our facts.

[MuseRider]

78. Good grief.

There are many people who think the Republicans are the way to go. Should they be shut up? I may wish that, you may wish that but we do not get to do that. It is YOUR OPINION that he is actively trying to ruin the country, and the world. I am sure there are many other intelligent people who feel the same way you do but most of them can refrain from having an internet tantrum to stir up shit on a web forum. If he is moving that way then he is simply moving that way. I don't see what he said as moving that way but so what if he is? It is his right, as it is the right for people to vote for whoever they wish and be free to explain that.

I did not realize we posters were in the business of deciding what an "acceptable opinion" was for journalists. Really? That is what the "fuck you" is all about? You decided that his opinion was not acceptable? How about this. His opinion makes you sick and you hate what he said but he has the right to say it so there you go, saying fuck you is just kinda stupid and it won't do anything but stir up more shit here.

I don't recall anyone here saying that his opinion was more valid or even valid because of who he (if they did that is equally stupid) is but I sure see a lot of people telling him to fuck off because they think his opinion is not acceptable therefore not valid because of who he is or is supposed to be. His opinion may be disagreeable to you but I would hardly call him ignorant and he has never seemed to me to be someone who blew off an article without putting some thought into it.

Face it, he feels differently than you. That is all it is. Will he influence people? Maybe a few maybe not. So what? We should all just fuck off unless we agree with you?

[TheWraith]

82. If someone believes the Republicans are "the way to go," they're wrong.

As well as being foolish/crazy/stupid/bigoted/any of the above. Again, someone holding an opinion does not make that opinion equally as valid as the real world. I can believe that my farts smell like roses, but that doesn't make it so; likewise, someone somewhere believing that voting Republican is the right thing to do doesn't make it any less the case that they are actively engaged in the political equivalent of mass arson.

[zappaman]

84. Well, to be honest....

MY farts DO smell like roses.
But, I agree with the rest of your points!

[MuseRider]

89. Must feel really good

to tell hundreds of thousands of people they are wrong just because you said so.

They are not wrong, they are like the people they are voting for. Yes they are bigots and all those other things. Yes those things are wrong but their vote would certainly be correct then wouldn't it? Correct for them.

Do you really think fuck off is a good way to change things?

Of course we think they are wrong on the Republican side. I myself think the Democrats are damn near as bad. They talk a good game but there has not been much follow through. Go ahead, post a list or tell me I am a horrible person. I really don't care. It is my opinion. My vote is my vote and not open for discussion. My opinion is also my own. I make it myself. All by myself and to my knowledge I have never thought of telling anyone who disagreed with me to fuck off.

I think I am done here. I have nothing more to say to you. I think your post was childish, I think you are kind of a bully using those tactics and I think you think the world should be asking you what they should be doing. Whatever. Maybe I am wrong. Maybe you will tell me? BTW, my opinion is valid. Probably not acceptable to you but valid.

[stevenleser]

103. Must be horrible not to have any courage of your convictions, other than defending Chris Hedges?

Or bashing Democrats.

[MuseRider]

111. What?

What a ridiculous statement.

Disagreeing with the movement of the party is not bashing.

As to the statement of the courage of my convictions, are you kidding me?

Sorry bud, I would stand up for anyone's right to speak their mind. To not do so would not be, ummmm, Democratic now would it?

[Union Scribe]

125. You know what's genuinely humorous

is that I always see these same people insist that they don't want to stifle criticism, just "bashing." But we see time and time again that they think the two are synonyms.

[Bonobo]

101. Oh dear. Now THAT is crazy talk.

"Because he is actively attempting to ruin the country, and the world."

Showing a bit much slip, Wraith.

[Union Scribe]

124. Yeah that's not over the top or anything.

If the internet was around in the time of the crusades, that's the sort of thing that would have been posted under the thread, "sign up, save civilization."

[Obamacare]

128. +1

I completely agree!! I'm starting wonder if Hedges and the like are being paid by rethugs to push this protest vote against Obama agenda. Knowing damn well what the results will be, a rethuglican president. I can't take these folks seriously at all. This is one of the most important elections ever, with everything Obama has accomplished and needs to complete is hanging in the balance. And he wants us to throw our votes away to some 3rd party candidate that doesn't have a snowball chance of winning. He might as well cast a vote for the rethug nominee, its pathetic. Since Hedges is campaigning for 3rd party candidates, its best that no more threads are posted regarding him. This site is for democrats and promoting democrats not 3rd party etc, at least that's what the rules state.

[Obamacare]

129. +1

I completely agree!! I'm starting wonder if Hedges and the like are being paid by rethugs to push this protest vote against Obama agenda. Knowing damn well what the results will be, a rethuglican president. I can't take these folks seriously at all. This is one of the most important elections ever, with everything Obama has accomplished and needs to finish hanging in the balance. And he wants us to throw our votes away to some 3rd party candidate that doesn't have a snowball chance of winning. He might as well cast a vote for the rethug nominee, its pathetic. Since Hedges is campaigning for 3rd party candidates, its best that no more threads are posted regarding him. This site is for democrats and promoting democrats not 3rd party etc, at least that's what the rules state.

[Hugabear]

20. There's no difference between OWS and the Tea Party

Of course, if you deny there's any difference between the GOP and Democrats, then you might be willing to accept my post title as well

[Leopolds Ghost]

96. OWS doesn't engage in electioneering. They will protest regardless of who wins.

Because the OWS message is that both parties have been corrupted by Wall Street.

Obviously the Republicans are much more flagrant case of the two, but our Dems
(the ones who actually get funded to get elected) seem to be hired to pick up the pieces.
I remember that article someone linked to here on Dennis Kucinich, on how he seemed
to carry water for whatever the party leaders wanted when his vote was actually needed,
and then set loose to play "relief valve" for the left wing of the Democcratic base.

[stevenleser]

104. Yes, but if you have no perspective at all, they are the same that is that poster's point

If Gore=Bush and Democrats=Republicans and Obama=the GOP Nominee, we can certainly say that OWS and the Tea Party are the same.

[Whisp]

23. good.

there were recommendations here to watch his show - I've been meaning to but its on at a time I keep missing. I have seen him here and there a bit on MSNBC and I didn't say anything here but his demeanour annoys me. He's just too hyper for my taste.

Now I learn he's an asshole, so good. ! Didn't waste any time on him.

[PA Democrat]

26. I think you are confused. Chris Hedges doesn't have a tv show.

[Whisp]

28. oh! I am wrong. thanks.

sorry about that I had a totally different person in mind. Good thing my mistakes don't cause any harm.

this guy looks like even a bigger asshole than the mistaken one.

[riverwalker]

43. Chris Hayes has the tv show n/t

[Whisp]

44. thankyou and apologies.

[Vanje]

118. Very deep observations

[Tierra_y_Libertad]

24. Go for it, if he's your type. As for me, I'll just agree with him in a platonic way.

[Cali_Democrat]

25. The real question remains: What can Obama and the Dems do to appeal to people like Chris Hedges?

Chris Hedges is exactly the kind of voter that the Democratic party should be going after. Perhaps a little less corporatism? Maybe a little less military adventurism and US government surveillance via the Patriot Act?

More protection of civil liberties? Less money spent on defense? How about holding the banksters and the 1% accountable for holding our economy hostage so that they can line their pockets?

There's nothing wrong with changing policies in order to appeal to these kinds of voters.

Just a thought.

[Uncle Joe]

31. + infinity with a cherry on top.

[gratuitous]

33. But if the Democrats did that, the Republicans would say mean things about them

So, in the meantime, watch what the two parties say, because there's a hueueueueuege difference between them that is not readily apparent when you watch what they actually do. And the former is far more important than the latter. Truly.

[ProSense]

36. Flawed

The real question remains: What can Obama and the Dems do to appeal to people like Chris Hedges?

Chris Hedges is exactly the kind of voter that the Democratic party should be going after. Perhaps a little less corporatism? Maybe a little less military adventurism and US government surveillance via the Patriot Act?

More protection of civil liberties? Less money spent on defense? How about holding the banksters and the 1% accountable for holding our economy hostage so that they can line their pockets?

There's nothing wrong with changing policies in order to appeal to these kinds of voters.

Just a thought.

...argument. Hedges always votes third party. He did not vote for Obama in 2008. He makes this declaration every election as if it's new.

ONLY NADER IS RIGHT ON THE ISSUES
http://www.naderlibrary.com/nader.teamemail110308.1.htm

Ralph Nader Is Tired of Running for President
http://www.democraticunderground.com/1002179101

The "Bush = (insert Democrat's name)" equation has failed miserably and with devastating consequences.

There's no difference between Gore and Bush...and we got the Iraq war.

There's no difference between Kerry and Bush (evidently, the death and destruction of the Iraq war wasn't difference enough)...and we got the economic collapse.

A person who votes against Democrats consistently (Gore, Kerry, Obama) isn't interested in being appealed to. Anyone who can't recognize the difference between the two parties isn't interested in seeing one.

Hedges can do whatever he wants to with his vote, but don't pretend that it's about forcing change for the better.

[raouldukelives]

42. Those values are quaint

But here in the "real world" we know we have to appeal to the more moderate members of our society. You know, the ones who don't like hearing about bummer things that make them sad like the erosion of our safety nets, secret prisons or drone strikes on families.
Now that we have firmly adopted "New & Improved!" values we can bring in many independent moderates who before might have been skeptical of our resolve to continue military expansion or turning a blind eye Wall St crimes.

[TheWraith]

69. Nope.

Hedges is an example of the type of voter who, no matter WHAT you do, will NEVER be pleased enough. Like Nader or Greenwald, he derives his entire political identity from being the Angry Outsider. And he demands that the Democrats drop EVERYTHING to cater to his 1% of the electorate, even when that means saying "fuck off" to the other 99% of the public, and what's actually plausible policy. It's the Tea Party Left.

[SammyWinstonJack]

70. Wouldn't that be great?

[FarLeftFist]

74. There are plenty in the D party who share those values as well.

[killbotfactory]

88. You cannot wait for a political party to come to you

You will wait forever, especially if you withhold any and all support from the political party you want to reform itself.

[joshcryer]

110. Obama cannot do very much to attain the white male vote.

Either you are a white male who understands politics, or you're a privileged diddling punk who doesn't want to vote for the lesser evil so they can maintain some sort of faux moral purity.

[redqueen]

138. "faux moral purity"

[99Forever]

35. My.

What a classy thing to say.

[JoePhilly]

37. Chris is pissed that Obama's re-election is almost assured.

Expect Chris to become screechier as that reality becomes more and more apparent.

But hey ... maybe Chris and the 3rd party folks can start a web site called 3rdPartyUnderground.com on which, they can work to advance their numerous candidates for 2016!!!!

[Surya Gayatri]

126. JP, love your laser-like vision--

it cuts straight to the core of the question!
SG

[abelenkpe]

38. You really should avoid NakedCapitalism.com then

Yves sees an evil Obama conspiracy in everything.

[TheWraith]

71. I try, particularly since they have a lot of "interesting" news...

...which doesn't seem to be supported by actual facts or sources.

[WilliamPitt]

39. Hedges seems to have an amazing power to derp some people out.

Comfort yourself with the fact that 85% of the voting populace has probably never heard of him.

I mean, if you need comfort.

P.S. DU is not America...and if the 2002, 2004, 2006, 2008 and 2010 elections serve as any guide, just about everyone here will do the right thing when they step into the voting booth come November.

[onenote]

45. More like 99.9 percent of the voting populace

Given that roughly 130 million votes were cast in 2008 (and the actual number eligible to vote obviously is much higher), 15 percent of that total would be over 19 million. I think we can all agree the number of people that have heard of Hedges (at least in the sense that if you asked them today if they knew who he was) is no where near 19 million. Or 1.9 million. Its probably a number in the thousands. If that.

[Gregorian]

40. I think a good analogy is the drunk not wanting to get sober.

Hedges has solutions. They just don't look good when working within a flawed system. But there aren't any other viable solutions besides revolution, among other things that are obvious but not happening within the system.

[Uncle Joe]

47. The system is changing opening up new viable solutions, the trillion dollar question

is will the Democratic Party evolve with it or become a 21st century version of the Whig Party with corporate supremacy being the 21st century version of slavery?

[Gregorian]

55. But it's a continual tug of war. Even if we do accomplish, say, election finance, how long before

the other side skirts around it?

I want to believe what you're saying. And I think OWS is one great pressure to wake Congress up. Perhaps it's so legitimate that both sides can't ignore it.

I keep in mind that Hitler came to power due to economic desperation. Hopefully we're intelligent enough to avoid that. Because I believe we're not coming out of our economic slump. Ever.

Loss of accurate media coverage. Corporate control of government. Education, or lack thereof. These are the hurdles.

[Uncle Joe]

63. I agree it's a continual tug of war. To take a phrase from the game "Dragon Age Origins"

Last edited Tue Jan 24, 2012, 04:20 AM - Edit history (1)

if you play the role of the mage, just as you successfully completed the Fade test, a Pride Demon admonishes you with this advice, "true tests never end."

I do believe the people are becoming more aware despite corporate media propaganda and corporate control of government. There will be a do or die moment for the parties, the longer they put facing these structural dysfunctions off, the more severe the correction will be.

I do believe our economic model will change, simply put because it must change, that won't be comfortable but it will become increasingly necessary.

I don't believe we will come out of our economic slump to our prior, global, post WWII hegemony, but that's ok so long as we adapt wisely to the new reality.

However in order to change our economic model we as a nation must defeat our own "Pride Demons" and become more inclusive both here and abroad, in short our values must and should change, I believe they're in the process of doing so.

[Gregorian]

72. That's well put.

I do agree. But fear and greed are so high on the human scale, I don't know how long it will take to become less violent.

I have to share something. I'm a mechanical engineer. I've been watching the MIT physics lectures to brush up on the basics. I doubt many people know that if you do the numbers on what is going on in an atom, you find something remarkable. If you scale a nucleus to the size of a grain of sand, then if you have a hydrogen atom, the electron orbit would be about the size of a basketball auditorium. And that means that most of the atom is a vacuum.

What this says is that the universe is essentially NOTHING. I could get religious about this, and maybe this isn't meaningful to many people. But I see a real sense of futility in this business of greed and fear. Or put another way, we are wasting a bunch of fucking time doing what we've been doing.

Instead of atomic bombs, we should be funding fusion research. That's kind of the bottom line. Once that is done (and it isn't more than a century away), we're done fighting over energy. And the benefit is that there might just be a planet left after the mess we've made so far.

We can't afford the tug of war any longer. This is why I support Hedges. Sooner or later we have to break the cycle. It's a catch 22. I will vote for Obama before I'll let a Republican ignoramus take the helm again. I don't know what it will take to break the cycle, but I haven't seen anyone with a better plan than Hedges. We all have to take the step for it to happen. I don't know how or when that step happens.

[bbgrunt]

46. whatever you say.........nt

[girl gone mad]

49. I doubt very much that you are his type.

[SunsetDreams]

54. exactly, Chris Hedges "type" is Third Party

Chris Hedges: "In this year’s presidential election I will vote for a third-party candidate"

http://www.democraticunderground.com/1002205710

Chris Hedges always votes third party. He did not vote for Obama in 2008. He makes this declaration every election as if it's new.

ONLY NADER IS RIGHT ON THE ISSUES
http://www.naderlibrary.com/nader.teamemail110308.1.htm

[redqueen]

59. He seems to be rather desperate for attention.

Making the same announcement, year after year, as if it's somehow news.

[SunsetDreams]

61. lol I know

Screw that

[Union Scribe]

122. Why is it only when people cross Obama supporters are

they called "desperate for attention"? I've noticed this in many of the ridiculous threads like these (by the way, wouldn't you say screaming "fuck this and that" in a post title is a little attention hungry?) targeting people who apparently didn't get the memo that "if you aren't with us you're against us and also fuck you."

[redqueen]

131. I didnt call him desperate for attention because he crossed Obama supporters

I called him desperate for attention because he seems to portray his deciding, once again, not to vote for someone who will help to keep the republican out of office, as if it is somehow news.

If he helps the GOP in their efforts to win the presidency at every opportunity, does it really warrant a press release or article or whatever? Why is it worthy of an announcement?

If you want to label people venting frustration about the reliably splintering left as desperate for attention that's your opinion. I sure wouldn't get all angered up because you think so.

[Number23]

92. Sounds like a big old whining, crying, attention whore

No wonder he has such a powerful contingent of fans here.

He makes this declaration every election as if it's new.

Gotta find some sort of way to keep the fan base swooning and the checks a'coming, I guess.

[MinervaX]

56. Descriptions like conservative and liberal

Are pretty much meaningless in this day and age.

[truebrit71]

57. .."the end of torture", "healthcare reform", "Wall Street reform"....

Oh wait, you were being serious???

[TheWraith]

60. Yep. That's what happens when you live in reality.

Instead of reading the bullshit that's spread around the internet echo chamber by people like Hedges who are actively trying to elect Republicans.

[truebrit71]

66. *yawn*

Yup, we should never criticise Dear Leader, he can do no wrong, and if you do dare suggest that he is mortal, you obviously want "insert republican candidate de jour here" to be in the WH instead...

Now, please go ahead and tell the class why you think that I must secretly want a republican in the WH too despite having been an active DEMOCRATIC poster here for donkeys years...

[zappaman]

68. Bored?

Big difference between criticism and this...Chris Hedges: "In this year’s presidential election I will vote for a third-party candidate."

[Union Scribe]

123. He isn't a DUer that I know of

so he's actually free to do as he wishes. And there isn't a damn thing all the people with their hands in knots over it can do about it.

[SidDithers]

97. "Dear Leader"? Obama is like Kim Jong Il now?...nt

Sid

[truebrit71]

135. He is above criticism around here...

...he has NEVER done anything wrong, he is so intellectually superior to all of us that we can't even begin to conceive of His brilliance that even though it appears that he is giving the republicans everything they want, it's actually a trap so highly-sophisticated that only the enlightened can see it...

So ya, around here he is the fucking 'Dear Leader'...

Oh and before you give me the knee-jerk "well he's better than the alternative" or "then you must want a republican in the WH" let me save you the time, I gave more than I could afford last time around to get this guy elected, and have watched him with increasing disappointment ever since he took the oath...twice...I don't want a republican in the WH, that's how we got in this ungodly mess in the first place, what I want is a Democrat in the WH that ACTS LIKE A FUCKING DEMOCRAT...

Until that time I will continue to criticise him when he errs, and congratulate him when he does well...

[ProSense]

62. Are

.."the end of torture", "healthcare reform", "Wall Street reform"....Oh wait, you were being serious???

...you?

• Ordered an end to the use of torture and cruel, inhuman, and degrading treatment, withdrew
  flawed legal analysis used to justify torture and applied the Army Field Manual on interrogations
  government wide.
  
• Abolished the CIA secret prisons.
  
• Says that “waterboarding is torture” and “contrary to America’s traditions… contrary to our ideals.”
  
• No reports of extraordinary rendition to torture or other cruelty under his administration.
  
• Failed to hold those responsible for past torture and other cruelty accountable; has blocked
  alleged victims of torture from having their day in court.

http://www.aclulibertywatch.org/ALWCandidateReportCard.pdf

Flashback: Richard Kirsch on the passage of health care reform
http://www.democraticunderground.com/1002200857

Cordray’s first target: The housing crisis
http://www.democraticunderground.com/1002163578

The Case for Obama...a truly historic presidency
http://www.democraticunderground.com/100233108

[truebrit71]

65. I don't deal with cut and paste talking points linked to your own posts as though they are facts...

...I deal with REAL facts...

Go spin somewhere else...

[Demonaut]

116. no, you don't deal with reality

[ScreamingMeemie]

114. I know, right? They say it so it HAS TO BE TRUE!

[SidDithers]

64. K&R...

fuck him and his campaigning for a third-party spoiler.

Sid

[denem]

73. K&R !!

[NorthCarolina]

76. Worst case of denial I've seen in a while. nt

[killbotfactory]

77. Voting third party in the presidential election is completely fucking stupid.

Obama or a Republican will win. End of story. If you see no difference between them you are out of your fucking mind. If you vote third party the only message the powers that be will receive is that you're an idiot to be disregarded.

Fuck.

[zappaman]

79. Ha!

well said!

[redqueen]

136. !!!

:kick:

[Pisces]

80. +1 million!!!

[RetroLounge]

83. Against his wishes? Are we advocating rape now on DU?

RL

[Quantess]

87. Meh. So many Dems who canvassed for Obama to make sure everybody got out and voted,

and so many people who got out did something out-of-character and voted...

...this election, a lot of them are not motivated to vote AT ALL.

[Sheepshank]

90. So you gonna hang around after the election and see how many people did vote?

because sounds to me like you are buying the msm meme that Dem voters are apathetic.

[Quantess]

91. Yes, I am buying that "meme".

I think it's based on reality.
No point quibbling about it until polls come out.
We'll have to wait to see what happens.

[Bonobo]

98. Myopic much? nt

[DCBob]

99. If that is crap he is peddling then I agree.

Forget Nader.. just look at the sick bastards running for GOP nomination. Anyone who cant see the difference is either blind or an idiot or lying or all three.

[redqueen]

134. You be the judge....

http://www.democraticunderground.com/1002205710

[mike_c]

100. welcome to ignore....

You have the honor of being the first DUer on DU3 whose posts are so odious that I cannot stand them any longer. Now, BE SILENT.

[Robb]

107. Is that what it takes?

[rudycantfail]

105. GDP circle jerk.

[got root]

106. I don't think that was a very convincing line of reasoning

I think it's the my way or the highway type of mentality that has gotten us here in the first place.

we can do better!

[ScreamingMeemie]

115. +1

And it gets more hysterical and unhinged sounding each time it is posted.

[DevonRex]

108. He's an idiotic tool. Fuck him. Nt

[joshcryer]

109. Fuck Voter Suppression tactics.

[Number23]

113. kick

[PhoenixAbove]

117. I have never felt the need to say fuck you to anybody on the internet. n/t

[dogknob]

119. There are significant differences between the parties.

Given the voter-suppression that is going on in the swing states, the GOP stands a good chance of winning even if they nominate Peter Griffin.

But what are we supposed to do when the President, as he is likely to, allows the architects of the 2008 financial collapse to purchase criminal immunity?

http://www.thenation.com/blog/165806/obama-brink-settlement-big-banks-and-progressives-are-furious

And when the president of the MPAA openly threatens the Democrats he bribed for their reversals on SOPA -- ON NATIONAL TELEVISION, what are we supposed to do?

http://www.theregister.co.uk/2012/01/23/mpaa_bribery_petition_white_house/

We are supposed to suck it up, that's what. Stick our heads in the sand because the alternative is worse. Maybe the Ostrich should replace the Donkey as the party's mascot.

[stockholmer]

120. this OP is so typical of the mindset of selling out fundmental social democratic ideals to a flawed

broken, gamed, corrupt 2-party corporatist political system. Go ahead, blast away at people who point out the flaws of BOTH the Donkey and the Elephant. Go ahead, play the lesser-of-two-evils game.

You will get all the loss of fairness, liberty, and social justice you deserve. What happened to trying to hold your party to account for the scurilous things they do?

What happened to trying to raise things up, not just tear and slash at critics who hold the same values you supposdly do, but instead of mindless party-driven, 'my party right or wrong' cheerleading actually try to push these values in the public arena of ideas?

You and others of a similar mindset are apparently owned and captive to an ideology of progressive capitulation.

For example, do you say 'fuck you' to critics of this? : The horrid NDAA signed by Obama, and his admin's support of warrantless wireless GPS tracking that was just slapped down by the SCOTUS NINE TO ZERO? Even the jackals Thomas, Scalia, Alito, etc said no to Obama.

How about this? :

The Nation: Obama Is on the Brink of a Settlement With the Big Banks—and Progressives Are Furious

http://www.democraticunderground.com/1002210027

When are the repeated, carefully planned and timed stabs in the back enough to realize you too bleed?


enjoy the kool-aid, drink it deep

[dogknob]

121. I guess great minds think alike.

You posted the "banks buying criminal immunity" link about a minute after I did.

[stockholmer]

133. agreed

[Douglas Carpenter]

127. I think Chris Hedges is a great man and brilliant thinker who happens to be wrong on one point

It is possible that a person can be essentially right on principle but wrong on the pragmatic side of seeking to advance those absolutely correct principles. I would vote for a third party too .. if I wasn't convinced that it would likely contribute more to harm than to advancing good.

[lonestarnot]

130. Yeah.

[tomp]

132. i'm going out on a limb here...

.....and betting you haven't read Hedges' "death of the liberal class."

if you had you would, at the very least, be less vehement in your opposition to the sound bite you posted about---that is assuming you have the intellect and open-mindedness to comprehend it.