What?

M, what indeed. Was it something you missed?

oh boy, another hothead ideological screed. it's called "politics" son and until they find something better than democracy we're stuck with it.

B, do you always state the obvious? It's a shame when members of the Democratic Party are too ashamed to face reality.

From my favorite anarchist bomber:

"Electoral abstentionism implies above all an absolute lack of confidence in the State. And this distrust, which is instinctive ... is for the anarchists the result of their historical experience with the State and its function. ... Furthermore, abstentionism has consequences which are much less superficial than the inert apathy ascribed to it. It strips the State of the constitutional fraud with which it presents itself to the gullible as the true representative of the whole nation, and in so doing, exposes its essential character as representative, procurer, and policeman of the ruling classes"

Luigi Galleani

You can also go with Emma G. - "If voting changed anything they'd make it illegal!"

:-) / r

T, I still hold votes have value, which is why so much is spent trying to get them. Voting for either the present Democratic or Republican Party is a waste of time since there isn't a dime's worth of difference between them. Wait, maybe a dime's worth, which is what all the media commotion is about. If you believe in constitutional rights, vote for just about anyone other than the Republicans or the Democrats.

No, I did not miss your talons in my side. I felt them. Dear Lord, you are excessive and like a menthol cig- good for a few puffs, but then after the bluster what is left?

And, I just said What to let you know I'm not for your view, but I read it and thought about what you had to say.

I call it pollyticks. Polly for multiple persona put on by elected officials- for lobbyist, for deep pockets, for poor and uneducated etc.. -ticks is for blood sucking parasites that are unaware of their host in only the way that counts- that there is more to people than their "blood". That people are infinite in their views and "one" way IN- sucking- is not going to sit well.

I give you and your kind another 20 years to hog the spotlight, but Repros are going to hit dirt after they take 2016 Presidency.

So, know I'm going to come back and read you, but I won't like anything you have to say to me and thus, I'll not give you a volley.

I'm certain you find error in ME THINKING= just as I find error in YOUR THINKING.

M, thanks for stopping by. Let me know when the reality train comes into town.

I'm going to have to institute a one comment per person rule. If you want to make your opinions known in ways unsuitable to a single message, please post to your own blog where instead sniping at the work of others, you can be the target for a change.

If you support Barack Obama believing his actions are wrong, you are a coward.

And by voting for Obama you are aiding and abetting a war criminal, making you a war criminal yourself.

I still hold votes have value, which is why so much is spent trying to get them. Voting for either the present Democratic or Republican Party is a waste of time since there isn't a dime's worth of difference between them. Wait, maybe a dime's worth, which is what all the media commotion is about.

Those four items alone are enough to not only impeach Barack Obama for failure to fulfill his oath of office but will lead to his prosecution as a war criminal once he is no longer a head of state.

If you are serious about this nonsense, none of which actually rises to the level of adult commentary, I would suggest you lay off the caffeine for a while…like several years or so.

If you are not serious…and are just trying to look absurd so that people realize it makes a lot more sense to support Barack Obama than someone like you…then you are doing a hell of a job. If that is the case, please continue. I support you, because I support Barack Obama.

F, if you don't think loss of habeus corpus is serious, well, I feel sorry for you. Like most Obama supporters, you refuse to accept facts which go against your fantasy. This is a shame. (Remember, only one comment per customer. Write your own piece if you think your opinion is of value.)

To answer the specific querry, No. However, speaking only for myself, it is very probable that faced with a very hungry wild animal, or being asked to leap from a functioning aircraft in mid flight, I would have to say, that I certainly am.

D, and well you should be owing to your inability to perceive a third option.

Don't urge him on, Peter. The fool WILL write his own piece explaining how despite world opinion that obama IS a war criminal, frank disagrees.

There will be no facts nor details concerning his disagreement as frank is fact averse.

Your bio shows that You have life filled with many and diverse experiences. You are precisely the type that frank likes to hector to death.

If You're lucky, You may win the grand prize and be called a "professional liberal." or told to "get Your head out of Your as*."

When it comes to vapid slogans frank is second to none.

M, good hearing from you again. If anyone wants to use opensalon as their platform, they can post on their own blog. Since I have total editorial control over this comment section, I have very little patience for those who I consider spammers.

I do not think I understand your response to my comment. By the use of a comma in the sentence seperating the two clause I believed I was making it clear that these were two seperate situations and in both situations I would be a coward. I did not mean to imply that they were two choices, and by extension thereby, somehow, imply that I neglected to considered a third option, but let me assure you that I am very sorry for the confusion. However, I am slightly hurt by the tone of your comment, if it, infact, was directed at me (as I cannot be certain, and could be making a terrible mistake) for it seems as though you are infering that I am lacking in mental capacity in some way. And though it is true that I have suffered from my own mental insuficiencies, I am sensitive to them being pinted out. it should not be taken that I mean to say you should be sorry, that is not the case. You were only, in my opinion, pointing out an observation. However, it still hurt my feelings, just a little bit.

D, well, that settles that.

u actually think by bullying your readers and "controlling" your blog you are going to convince somebody of your ideology? You are so naive you actually think you have some grip on "reality" others don't because you say you know better? Gumpy, I can see why you've led a crooked path. Stick with the circus. It's where you belong.

Either you're part of the problem or part of the solution. Obama is part of the problem.

The whole idea of standing up for what's right is not considered "politically viable" and therefore should be dismissed is absurd and suicidal. Reality does not answer to politics, it's the other way around.

See

http://www.law.harvard.edu/news/2012/02/10_nader-fein-americas-lawless-empire.html

There's nothing quite so fine as a line in the sand that will tolerate no compromises and allow no wiggle room in the argument.

While I happen to think there aren't any real courageous Democrats in office today, I don't believe there are any Republicans with any sway that are courageous either. Brazen, yes, but courageous, no.

And who amongst the political establishment is going to prosecute Bush, Cheney, Rumsfeld, Rice and Gonzalez? I mean, if we're going to stand our ground and not budge, then shouldn't those folks be first in line as war criminals, committers of fraud, treason and wholesale slaughter of Americans, Iraqis, Aghanis and others?

So, while I think Obama has continued some things that make him suspect as to whether or not you could legally call him a War Criminal, there is absolutely no doubt that the Bush Administration, nearly en toto, qualifies as such and more.

So, until they arrest Bush, Cheney, Rumsfeld, Rice and Gonzalez, y0u'll pardon me if I don't tote a sign calling for the immediate arrest and prosecution of Obama.

I believe we should get rid of all incumbents in all parties and just start over. I think we have a much better chance of doing that, before we'll ever see an arrest of a former Commander in Chief, Democrat or Republican.

And until we all get together and decide to change things, then this sort of argument does nothing to promote such change as it's clearly so one sided that it cannot gain enough traction from both sides of the equation.

I don't necessarily disagree with your view, just the way it's expressed. Hang in there, though. Politics has shown that if you can shout loud enough, long enough, even if no-one actually believes you, they'll start humming the tune anyway.

It is not an argument. It is a clear statement of fact. The Constitution clearly states what is an impeachable action. It says what is permitted and what is denied. This is not an argument. It is a fact. Clinton was impeached for someone playing with his nether parts in the Oval Office. I doubt that is stated in the Constitution as an impeachable offense. Obama has clearly performed impeachable acts. If the American public accepts that as permissible the Constitution becomes invalid.

I'm just curious: who is your non-cool-kid alternative suggestion?

Here is the impeach Obama petition, for those who haven't already signed:

http://www.thepetitionsite.com/3/impeach-obama/

I'll reiterate my position. I cannot call for the impeachment of Obama until and AFTER the previous administration stands trial for the crimes that Obama seems to be perpetuating. Two unneccessary wars, killing American Citizens (as soldiers), Afghani, Iraqi and other peoples indiscriminately whether or not they were actually combatants, outing an undecover CIA operative for no other reason than spite (*this is considered High Treason, by the way,) lying to start a war, using the false and known to be false claim that Iraq was seeking nuclear weapons grade materials from South Africa, warrantless wiretapping, including American Citizens, rendition, torture, illegal contracts, ethical conflict of interests in awarding no-bid contracts and the list just goes on and on and on.

If those bastards get theirs, I'll happily join the Kumbaya Let's Get Obama Crowd. Until then, impeaching Obama under these conditions and letting those other fuckers go is not only an affront to sanity and reason, it's hypocrisy on an unimaginable scale.

So good luck with that.

Ben Sen, since you defame the circus I will respond. You know nothing about the circus, if you wish to learn (which I doubt), I suggest you read my book. It will cure your ignorance of the subject at the very least.

HG, you are most correct regarding reality and politics.

JS, as I've mentioned, this is a most rewarding site. http://www.law.harvard.edu/news/2012/02/10_nader-fein-americas-lawless-empire.html
Thanks again.

D, I believe you are missing the point. It is Obama who must prosecute Bush. No excuses. This is his job under the Constitution.

LD, my non-cool kid suggestion is to vote Green.

I think it is totally dishonest to negate an opinion by trying to identify the person by a party affiliation. Mango had you been able to take on the topic rather than the person it might have been interesting to read that exchange. But you opted instead to justify your disbelief by saying Peter is a Repro, whatever that is. I think you were offended because Peter points out that by participating in the 2 party system, even when there is evidence that it is broken beyond repair, we are guilty by association. Just as Germans, who were aware of what was happening with Jews, Gypsies, and anyone they deemed enemies of the state were judged by the world as having to shoulder a portion of the blame. Do you think a vote which didn't really change our foreign policy and further restricted our freedom says we aren't participants? Do you think those whites who enjoyed the privileges their color granted them in South Africa, but who never said this is wrong were blameless? How about those who benefited from slavery.

D, every vote for Obama is a vote supporting the policy that torturers will never be brought to justice in the United States of America.

Good question!

Yes!

Cowards and hypocrites!

(But you still have to make an exception for a few million retards among them, like most of the denizens of Daily Kos.)

I've befriended you. I've long contended that ideology is the redoubt of bullies. It gives small men the opportunity to beat their chest and pretend they're superior. Everybody knows they also are the ones with the thinnest skins. You fit the bill perfectly. Nothing gives me more pleasure than giving bullies new orifices; I can hardly wait. You don't know what politics is, I'm going to teach you. You can run away, but you can't hide unless the comments are closed and then you don't get your little thrill, and what good is that to a bully?

Yep, our president might as well be a republican. [r]

So, who are you going to write in?

J, a few million might be a low estimate.

P, I will be voting Green. Close enough for government work. Cheers.

[r] What part of "Thou Shalt Not Kill" do they not understand? Too ideological for them? Geeeeeeeezzzzzzzz.

L, it seems a bunch of folks are being bought off cheap. It's time to raise the moral standards in this country.

fRANK suggests You lay off caffeine - maybe if You do it the apisa way, You'll see things more clearly:


I, for instance, always limited myself to 5 or 6 joints a day...and often I would take a day or two off EACH YEAR.

Frank Apisa
SEPTEMBER 08, 2011 08:10 PM