i agree with almost everything nader has said.

[taxidriver]

corporations have too much power. the parties are too much alike, and have too much extensive control over government. the iraq war was wrong, period. hybrid cars and new fuels should have already been in use 5-10 years ago, the technology was there.

it has really been pissing me off lately that with our two party system, i cant vote for the person i like more than kerry without desecrating the ABB ideology.

and i do understand, by the way, that i must vote for kerry. *sigh*.

any other frustrated green-leaners out there?

[aquart]

1. You might want to check what Nader says against what he does.

Pretty much the definition of hypocrisy.

[annak110]

23. At least what you are told he does...

When you check out what he actually does against the bs of rightwing smear propaganda I think you will find that he is fighting hard against Corporate (fascist, corporative) power and that he always has.

[NMDemDist2]

2. I am a "green leaner" but wouldn't vote for Ralphie if he was the

last man on earth. He is a horrible man and his ethics are questionable at best

[7th_Sephiroth]

3. a few thing about hybrid cars

#1 thier batteries die every 100,000 miles and cost $7,000 to replace
#2 after about 5,000 miles the gas mileage on them goes into toilet (my neighbor owns one and is regretting it)

[DenverDem]

4. I have come to terms with incremental change.

We just have to make sure change happens. The first step has to be changing administrations, then forcing OUR administration to head in the right direction.

[nothingshocksmeanymore]

5. Edwards has said similar things

and even if Kerry and Edwards entirely mimicked Nader on that point..the malcontentious belly aching left would find another area of imperfection to suck space out of the rest of us with...what they've never proven is that their policies could keep a population of over 300 million employed and fed.

Give it a rest.

[Name removed]

11. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[nothingshocksmeanymore]

13. Oh bullshit...

It's easy to defend the record of a party that doesn't have one...and Nader has certainly proven his honesty and integrity in the matter...like using Repuke funds and voters to get his undermining Benedict Arnold ass on the ballot in Washington state....

now do you have anything other than personal attacks to offer?

[CWebster]

22. You surely have convinced me of the error of my ways! nt

[nothingshocksmeanymore]

28. Like I ever stood a chance

4 years of the most horrible policies to ever hit America and you are still acting like there isn't a real choice.

4 years of ravaging the environment

4 years of manipulating the population with fear and intimidation

4 years of people losing jobs and seeing them shipped abroad

4 years of corporate crimes going completely unpunished

4 years of looting the treasury and handing it off to Bush's corporate cronies

4 years of the poverty level increasing

4 years of more unions being undermined


If none of that is persuasive enough...perhaps you might want to check on the degree to which your own heels are dug in.

And what has Nader done? He continues to run in close states KNOWING FULL WELL the disastrous end it COULD achieve....HARNING THE VERY PEOPLE HE FUCKING CLAIMS TO WANT TO HELP....disingenuous...

you may be fond of the idea of violent revolution...it's a nice wildeyed thought to have....I am not nor are most people with a scintilla of practicality.

I am NOT trying to convince you...it's up to you and your own brain cells and conscience now...

[CWebster]

30. Yes, nsma

Who was it that often enough voted to support your list?

[nothingshocksmeanymore]

34. I am not clear of what you are asking

[GreenArrow]

47. I think he's saying that it takes

two to Tango.

[nothingshocksmeanymore]

54. and if there were only two voters, that would make sense

there are millions and millions...compromise is far more preferable to take no prisoners and a half a loaf is better than no loaf at all.

[GreenArrow]

83. but it (Cwebster's post) isn't about the voters, per se

it's about the parties and whether the two parties are colluding to form a single corporate entity, which I personally believe is the case. It's the old divide and conquer philosphy in action.

[nothingshocksmeanymore]

90. Then please explain to me how it is that Clinton actively pursued

a class action case against Microsoft that was dropped by Bush...explain how it is that Clinton when he couldn't get an ergonomic rule passed through congress did it by EO, only to have it reversed by Bush. Please explain how it is that Clinton pursued MORE anti-trust cases and passed an International AntiTrust Act with Europe..and most probably would have pursued it with other nations...please explain how it is that Dems did their best to hold out for unions when Bush was undermining them...people MAY point to welfare reform but Clinton DID wish to fix aspects of it that were harmful...please explain how the number of people living in poverty in America went DOWN under Clinton and UP under Bush....can you?

[GreenArrow]

99. Clinton pursued other things as well

notably, out-out toughing the Republicans on crime issues, with an increase in prisons filled, incarcerating nearly twice as many new inmates as under the previous Bush administration. Many of these were victims of the Bill of Rights shredding "drug war" which Clinton supported vigourosly and happiliy. Not content with pursuing non-violent drug offenders stateside, Clinton also exported his get tough policy overseas to places like Columbia with the vile Plan Columbia. While intervension in central and South America is nothing new, it has been something both parties can agree on.

So while Clinton may have attempted to undertake useful things like his anti-trust suit, it might be more instructive to looks for points of agreement between the Democrats and Repbulicans because it there that both parties interests converge.

[nothingshocksmeanymore]

107. While I agree with you about that..I would also point out that some people

like to claim the parties are unresponsive to their constituents...but you might wish to recognize violent crime IS AND WAS a major issue for voters...you also fail to recognize that many prisons are filled due to laws at the state level NOT the federal level...that is why one can be in prison for merely SMOKING pot in one state while given a ticket in another such as California....therefore your blame is misplaced.

I don't disagree on Plan Columbia...it was and is a sham.

[sangh0]

109. So we should ignore the differences

and THEN we can prove that "there's no difference"?

Try again.

So while Clinton may have attempted to undertake useful things like his anti-trust suit, it might be more instructive to looks for points of agreement between the Democrats and Repbulicans because it there that both parties interests converge.

[CWebster]

64. You listed grievances

Who voted to support many of them?

[nothingshocksmeanymore]

65. You tell me...the burden is on you to prove that up

[taxidriver]

16. i was venting as much about my annoyance at the way the government

has become as I was about voting for kerry. and anyone who says that the current american political situation isnt worth complaining about is a fool.

[nothingshocksmeanymore]

33. Sure but does complaining accomplish anything?

My POINT is that there is work to do...I have NOT EVER suggested the left give UP their CAUSES..only that they act with full knowledge of the UNINTENDED consequences of their actions...as we have already witnessed for the last 4 years.

[CWebster]

66. It is not the Left's fault

that the Democratic party capitulates or adopts Republican policy under their own banner.

[Name removed]

70. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[CWebster]

76. "How about expressing a complex thought? Got any?"

That is little more than an insult.

If you want to just throw insults and blame around, I can't really see how you are trying to convince anyone.

[nothingshocksmeanymore]

77. And again..no response to my points

again...hit the alert if you deem it to be so injurious...frankly I think your posts in the matter are much more injurious to your reputation as a debater who relies on reason than any response I could give.

[CWebster]

91. That was another insult

lol.

[neverborn]

97. That was another pointless post that had nothing to offer

NSMA is wasting her time with points on you, when all you can come up with is "LOL AN INZULT HAHAS"

[GreenPartyVoter]

6. You bet. I am annoyed that I can't support Ralph or the Greens

or Dennis on the big ticket, but that's our option for this time around.

So I am hoping that our Dem DU friends will help us gather signatures to get our party back on the ballot after so many of us voting for Kerry/Edwards kills it off.

[amber dog democrat]

7. Truthfully you should vote as your conscience dictates.

What is the point of having a franchise if one does not exercise it?
That said, as I understand it, Votig for Nader plays into Bushes re election.

I can not support Nader and with so much as stake I don't see the Green party as a viable choice - You will need to make up your own mind on this.

All the same I feel for you. Duirng one of the elections I felt I should have really voted for John Anderson.

[Warpy]

8. Of course you're going to hear a clearer and more

sensile message from a fringe party, no matter what your political orientation is. That's what fringe parties are FOR.

In an ordinary year, voting your conscience for a fringe candidate will let the big parties know what the issues a lot of people are thinking about are, and which ones are worth coopting. It usually doesn't matter to the ordinary person which gang of thieves gets in.

However, this isn't an ordinary year. This year there is a clear difference between the worst president this country has ever had and a capable, business as usual sort of guy. Indulging yourself by insisting on ideological purity this time can allow the worst man ever to hold the job to steal the office, once again.

Bush is a disaster, and his gang of thieves and religious wack jobs would like nothing better than to destroy us all to pave the way for Armageddon.

If you want to keep living, hold your nose and vote for Kerry.

[Az]

9. Ralph is a social champion but a tactical imbecille

We are faced with two choices. Fight to bring this nation back to reason and progressive ideals or let the right win in order to wake the people to the dangers of their ideals. Ralph has chosen the latter position. He no longer believes that We The People can struggle to drag this nation back from the claws of the corporations. He believes the only way to take this nation back from them is to let people see them for what they are.

I am of the opinion that given the chance the corporate entities combined with the religious right would initiate a new dark age in this nation in their bid to cement their hold on us. The threat this poses is to great to warrant the gamble that the rise of their power would awake the people to this danger. We must fight here. We must fight now. We have created a monster in the form of the Corporate entity. We must tame this beast we have created and never let it loose again.

[CWebster]

15. Interesting post

The greatest fear, is like the German people, they will be either twisted by fear and propaganda to ever realize it.

[nothingshocksmeanymore]

29. The far left could take a cue from the Germans

Hitler had their assistance coming to power

[CWebster]

35. I agree, nsma

Shame on the Senate for clammoring to get their photo ops with the would be furer.

[nothingshocksmeanymore]

36. The entire senate? There you go with useless generalizations again

Oh....and what of Ralph's photo op with Grover Nordquist?

[CWebster]

38. The entire Left?

C'mon NSMA. You used to be such a nice girl (;-) and I did enjoy reading what you whipped up for Thanksgiving one year. Still in San Fran?

[nothingshocksmeanymore]

40. I never said the entire left...many of us on the left..and YES I include

me in that are PRAGMATISTS who can SEE that if ONE divides our numbers we get nothing...BTW..I've never lived in San Francisco so perhaps you are confusing me with someone else.

IF anything...the "take no prisoners and make NO compromises segment" of the the left has PUSHED me away...a BRILLIANT example of such was PETER Camejo running aroung college campuses helping the right get petitions signed for the recall....look at what they accomplished (even though in the end they did a mea culpa and asked people to vote against the recall) See my point? Once again..they HARMED those whom they claimed they wanted to help.

[CWebster]

42. Sorry

California though, right?

I think there are some good responses on this thread, what do you think?

(Aside from the deleted one, which in days gone by, would've been strike 1)

[sniffa]

10. you want garLic on your eggs?

[info being]

12. I'm a Green, agree with everything Ralph says...

and would never vote for him. I don't trust him anymore.

[reprehensor]

26. I respect you. So damn much.

Ralph has been compromised.

Bush must go, after that, Kerry will have exactly 4 years to begin to try and change the direction of this country.

During that 4 year period, voters who had to hold their noses while voting for Kerry, will need to work overtime to get their message out, and expose the Empire for what it is.

Temporary Kerry.

[Dardi]

81. What do you think will happen in 4 years?

This same discussion will be going on and, Kerry or (if he doesn't win or doesn't run for re-election) some other DNC Democrat will be running against some Republican that no one here can stand and people will be telling the Greens, the Socialists, etc. to sit down and shut up for the good of the party and the country (and, oh, btw, vote for our guy!!). At some point, people who want to vote their conscience are either going to have to vote their conscience or give up on that dream. It's not going to get any easier.

[JHBowden]

14. The parties are too much alike?

The Republicans just rammed a judge through the Senate that believes rape doesn't cause pregnancy and a woman's role is to be subservient to a man. I'm a moderate Democrat, and I'll never be "too much alike" to these American Taliban.

[taxidriver]

20. nearly as many dems voted for IWR as republicans did.

and on and on.

[JHBowden]

25. Well, besides health care, social security,

the environment, education, taxation, judges, abortion, trade, energy, and affirmative action, you might have a point.

But you don't. While about half as many Democrats as Republicans supported getting the weapons inspectors into Iraq in October 2002, I know of very few that supported pulling them out to start a war at random.

[annak110]

17. Yes, I've been fighting the "one party" system most of my life

and I'm 68. Nader has always had it right and has fought hard for years to help raise people's consciousness about what is going on around them.

I'm going independent or Green right after this election and intend to push like hell for, at the very least, a two party system.

[Warpy]

37. I'm with you

I've spent my entire adult life watching the protections of the New Deal be dismantled and working people robbed to fatten the rich.

I'll continue to vote Green locally, just to get progressives into the political pipeline, and knowing they'll change party affiliation if they go national.

I'll hold my nose and vote Dem nationally, though, since they are the best hope we have of slapping these religious wack jobs down. I hold no illusions about their taking on the corporate thieves, though, nor of their abandoning the ruinous dogma of free trade combined with a strong dollar policy.

One thing at a time. Right now, getting rid of Bush is a survival issue, and that trumps everything else.

[iconoclastic cat]

18. Wait, what does the Green Party have to do with Nader now, anyway?

I thought they broke up!

[Kazak]

19. Er...

David Cobb is the Green Candidate this year... :shrug:

[demigoddess]

21. did you ever think of running for public office at

a local level and acting as a green in that capacity? Greens would make a bigger impact by going local instead of trying to get one man into the white house. So many environmental and corporation decisions are made at the local level that have a really big impact. Right now i am involved in local things and you can do big things at that level whether you realize it or not. in a small town one voice makes a big difference. This is how the republican party became such a big power.

[Nlighten1]

24. I agree too.

And I think most people would agree with this...

http://gnn.tv/countdown


Watch that movie and tell me you don't agree with what he is saying.

[sendero]

27. I agree....

.... with 90% of what Nader has to say. But Nader is not, nor will he ever be having thoroughly fucked the people he claims to champion, in a position to implement a single item of his agenda.

We have a 2-party system. It sucks, and frankly I think most of us would prefer something more European with more diverse representation. But, wish in one hand and .... the other as the saying goes.

So, I'm voting for Kerry and I'm hoping to move the Dem party back to the left where it belongs. It won't happen easily or quickly, but Nader won't happen ever.

[Dogmudgeon]

31. This is gonna sound mean

But I hope you will understand what I'm trying to say.

Many Progressives have a bad case of passivity. A huge amount of Progressive political rhetoric is based on the idea that politics is something that they are given: "Al Gore has to EARN my vote ... the Democrats won't GIVE us a suitable candidate to vote for ... I'm voting MY conscience ... Bill Clinton GAVE us NAFTA ... " etc.

This kind of passivity in politics is a fast-track method to non-representation.

In fact, there's only one real solution, and that is for Progressives to organize politically in the real world of politics. As mundane as it may seems, organizing to get elected to school boards and local positions is FAR more effective than "mobilizing to speak truth to power". While public protest is often needed, the modern Progressive movement relies far too much on it.

Take a look at how the New Right came into power in the 1970s. They started with a period of low-profile organzing, lining up donors and patrons, running for small, local positions (and taking over school boards so they could promote their agenda to schoolchildren), building databases and embryonic think-tanks. When Ronald Reagan ran for president in 1980, there was a ready-made apparatus that was used to bring him into power.

The Progressive movement ought to make the low-level grass-roots work its prime focus after this election. Even if Kerry/Edwards wins the White House, there will still be a need to pull the "national conversation" toward the left. By establishing a broad, national Progressive movement at the lowest levels of politics, the very highest placed politicians will become responsive.

And THAT is a powerful antidote to frustration.

It's far less sexy than "taking back the streets" but it's every bit as effective in the short run. And in the long run, it can bring progressive political ideals into the mainstream -- permanently.

--bkl

[nothingshocksmeanymore]

46. Probably the best post ever on this subject. Thanks.

[CWebster]

49. Well, I was about to post the same thing

Look, we agree, nsma.

[nothingshocksmeanymore]

63. I don't see how we can agree when you continue to advocate for

Nader..whose very tactics are the anti-thesis of BKL's suggestions...rather than impact at the state level...he is running in close states where few votes can swing the electorate one way or another such as Washington State, Oregon and his efforts in Arizona.

[CWebster]

69. I do not advocate for Nader so much as

react against the ongoing target he has been made out to be. If your effort is to court his supporters by insulting them, then why should they treat you with anything other than contempt?

[nothingshocksmeanymore]

74. OK that is a nice double standard..Nader makes the Dems targets

but they are not allowed to respond in kind...isn't that humorous when we are accused of laying down so often?

They can treat me however they wish...I will continue to battle with their errors in judgement and their inability to reason within the realities of the electoral college.

[CWebster]

78. That don't EVER EVER complain

about what is on your plate when the DLC bows to corporate dictates and weakens support for the party from the voters.

You better fucking hope there is always a monster on the other side, because at this rate it will be the only was the Democrats can get elected.

[nothingshocksmeanymore]

79. YOu say that as though the DLC is the controlling factor in this election

From what I noticed...they were heavily pushing Lieberman...he was DOA....

oh..and if I might point out...your response was a complete non-sequitur to what I actually posted....hope that telling you your response had nothing to do with what I actually said is not perceived as a personal attack....

[sendero]

61. Now...

...you're talking. Exactly. There is no "magic candidate" that is going to fix our country. It's going to take a bunch of people in a concerted effort.

[Selwynn]

32. I agree with Nader's message; do not think he is best choice for president

I agree that coporations have too much power and the parties are too much alike. But just because Nader is saying it doesn't mean I think Nader himself would make a great president. This year, its the year of the bad choices. Bush, Nader, Kerry - they're all not great choices in my book. Out of those not great choices, Kerry is both better than Bush and better than Nader, in my opinion.

[Az]

39. Nader's argument in a nut shell

The Democratic party has failed its charge. It is part of the same entity that controls the Republicans. It has passed beyond salvation. It has become part of the problem. By not being the opposition to the rise of Corporate power that the people need the Democratic party has become an enabler to the right. By destroying the Democrats he believes he will free those that feel they must vote dem to stop the repubs to be able to vote for real candidates that are prepared to fight for the people.

There it is. One big nutshell.

[nothingshocksmeanymore]

41. Yes that is exactly what his argument is..now get a pencil

the nation is almost divided 50/50...if one half holds together at 50 and the other splinters into 35/15...who wins?

[Az]

44. Here's the thing

Its really not the responsibility of the leaders to change this equation. They are fighting to do what they can to hold back the right. We The freaking People have to make the difference. We let the corporations get the upper hand on us. Its going to take a lot of work to take the power back but no one is going to hand it to us. The Democrats have to play with the rules as we let them degrade to. Its a simple numbers game for them. They can only do what the current conditions will let them do.

We need to create systems to counter the right. We need to champion the left. We need the people to see the sense of our position over the rhetoric of the rights.

[CWebster]

48. I don't know whether I completely buy this.

There is no denying there are influences within the party leadership who align themselves with Republican policy. Everyday there are discussions about the Rightward drift. That is capitulation by the party leadership, not the voters who are left with lesser evil choices.

[Az]

51. Its a spectrum

Think chicken or egg time. There would not be the rise of Lieberman's and Zell's without the environment being open to them. Because there is no voice calling out progressive ideals the right has had an open field and has dragged us in their direction. It is worth noting that the tactics of the right are not republican specific. The organisations involved have a willing partner in the repubs but their rhetoric is purely right wing rhetoric.

The counter to this is not pumping up the Dems necissarily. It is championing left ideals. Showing the arguments for them. Placing them before the people. I think the thing the right figured out was that you cannot rely on a party to carry the banner. A party will vary and change with public opinion and individual leaders. If instead you gain control of the message before the people and can tailor it to fit your ideals you win before the battle is even joined. Anyone that has read Sun Tsu will recognise the wisdom of this tactic. They have taken the very ground we fight our battle on.

[nothingshocksmeanymore]

53. I very much agree...the right also did this over 30 years in a different

culture....we seem to be expecting instant gratification...patience, unity where we can achieve it and pulling as in tug of war where one gets a small advantage at a time is necessary....this is why I DO support Greens at making inroads at the STATE level...getting some results legislatively under their belts and moving from there

[GreenArrow]

55. "Its not the responsibility of the leaders to change this equation"

then what responsiblities do our "leaders" have? Should they not be setting examples for the people? It would seem to me that many of our "leaders" have held "back the right" by emulating them ever more slavishly.

[Az]

57. Its a representational democracy

They are supposed to represent what we want them to. They have to take their lead from us. If we do not give them a clear voice to speak with then they cannot manufacture one out of thin air.

[CWebster]

62. Well think about the IRW vote

The millions who protested around the world. The constant and obvious effort to push an Invasion based on, at the very least, suspect evidence. Begrudging and only over time and constant erosion did those polls shift. Even under the constant bombardment of propaganda and lies did the polled public stipulate that they prefered a international effort and UN investigations to continue. Constituents buried their representitives with protests running against Invasion--and where were the Leaders to advocate for the people, in defense of the people, to keep our young out of harm's way? Where were our Representitives to speak against this madness?

[nothingshocksmeanymore]

67. I think you forget quite a few Democrats VOTED against it

and once again I CHALLENGE YOU TO DEMONSTRATE that that vote would have made a rat's ass bit of difference in the end result...that war was going to happen regardless.

[CWebster]

71. Well, that's the spirit, nsma

Might as well vote along with the bastards, since we are gonna lose this thing anyway.

[nothingshocksmeanymore]

72. OK I can no longer tolerate one liners void of any true desire

to actually communicate point by point...have a nice day

[Az]

75. The point here

Is that its not just about the votes. Politicians have to follow the people. Its their job. If the people give up their roll of extolling the path they wish to move down then the politicians are going to become complaicent and simply go where ever they can muster the most support.

A vote is just one signal. Its not the only signal. Wake this freaking nation up. Make people see where the corporations are taking us. Make them realise that the stock market is not the pulse of the people. We The People have to take this nation back. No one is going to hand it to us.

[CWebster]

80. What if consensus is manufactured?

Most people claim that issues like healthcare and the environment take priority in their concerns, but that is not represented by the politicians or the media. I don't really think your theory is valid in our corporate age.

[Az]

85. Exactly the problem

It is no longer an age of people. It is the age of Corporate entities. We gave our society into the hands of the Corporations in faith that they would lead us to prosperity. But the only rule Corporations follow is what favors them. This does not always coincide with what is of interest to We The People.

But it has gone on for so long we no longer recognise the difference between what is good for the people and what is good for the corporations. All our measures and scales are based on the good for corporations. With no human hand controlling the forces that guide the corporations they need only serve themself.

We The People have to take certain responsibilities back under our control. The Press. The airwaves. Elections. We must walk out of our gilded cage before the gate is locked forever.

[nothingshocksmeanymore]

89. Gee...why is it that Kerry had campaigned heavily on healthcare

and has been considered a champion of the environment to many?

[GreenArrow]

88. you beat me to it

can't add much to it either. The perfect example, timely and apt.

Take Kerry and Edwards, and the IWR issue. They were both elected to fulfill the wishes of their constituents. Insofar as they had input from thier constituents, on this issue (input and information that has proven time and again to be accurate,) it was in both cases far and away in favor of not supporting the IWR. This was input largely from the most educated and active segments of society. Of course, both candidates supported IWR anyway, using as one of their justifications that they were privy to info that the rest of us didn't have, an excuse that most people were happy to expect.

[sangh0]

101. What are you talking about?

At the time of the IWR vote, a majority of Mass residents SUPPORTED a yes vote.

both candidates supported IWR anyway, using as one of their justifications that they were privy to info that the rest of us didn't have, an excuse that most people were happy to expect

Did you just make that up? Kerry never said anything like that.

[GreenArrow]

73. "Its a representational democracy"

So it is said. But how often does it actually work like that? And, do the people we elect as "leaders" see it that way? Do they see themselves as proxies, in power to do our bidding, or do they see themsleves as shapers of opinion, and as occupying a state above that of the average citizen? Do they reflect public opinion, or do they manipulate it?

[Az]

82. The reason it stopped working

Is because thinking became unfashionable. Being involved became a social taboo. Its impolite to discuss politics. We lost the ability to see where we are going.

We trust the stock market to be the guage of how we are doing. But it doesn't measure how we are doing. We have been taught to hate taxes and forget that taxes are how we obtain representation. There are forces that wish the government to go away. Its not for our good that they wish this. It is for their own good. Because the government stands in their way of dominating (economic and religious) the people.

We have become isolated and desocialised. Competition with each other is favored over cooperation with each other. We are taught to protect ourselves from each other rather that to rely on each other. We are being pulled apart to make it easier for those who would prey upon us to pick us apart alone and without defense.

There is not concerted effort to do this. There is no shadowy group of men in smoke filled rooms directing this. It is simply the result of leaving our society in the hands of systems that we rely on to simplify dealing with life. Corporations and Religions simply follow natural laws of survival incorporated in their structures. They simply do what is necissary to survive. They have no concern for the individual or the society beyond what it provides to them as host. We The People are the only entity that can speak for ourselves and we have given up our voice to these constructs that we believe serve us.

[GreenArrow]

94. i do agree with your basic premise, and many of your

points, but, how and why do you think that thinking became unfashionable? Who taught us that being involved is a social taboo, that the Stock Market is the arbiter of how we are doing? Who is doing this to us? I tend to believe in smoke filled rooms myself, but It would seem from your final paragraph that you take a mechanistic approach. If we have become so mechanised, then how do we break out of the trap? Will the systems, even if designed to ensure their own survival, break of their own accord, when they are forced to undertake too many conflicting tasks at the same time?

[Az]

96. Some of the solution is legal

Some of it is social. Yes there are men in smoke filled rooms trying to pad their own pockets and they do have an effect. But the system we have put in place even restricts their actions. There are individuals with hearts and compassion in these institutional structures. But their ability to act is constrained by the rules that govern the structures they work for.

When a manager fires a group of employees it is not with joy that they do so. They are simply a cog in the machine acting as they have to. When a CEO directs a company he understands the lives that are affected by his/her actions. But the life of the corporation takes priority by definition. While the system is made of people it is predicated on the rules that the corporations find themself embedded in.

Over time advertising discovers how to push the right buttons to influence people's choice and eventually how to change the nature of the supply/demand curve. When the corporation can manipulate demand without changing the product the system becomes unbalanced and no longer favors the consumer.

The lessons learned in marketting products are transfered to manipulating those in charge or regulating the Corporation. This further cuts the strings of control that the population has over the corporations.

Because critical thought and skepticism represent a threat to the control of the demand side of the curve they are marketted against as well. Things which promote adherence and obediance are offered before the public as ideals rather than questioning things.

The objective of the business model is to render the human species utterly dependent on a continuous flow of product from each individual corporation. In other words the Corporations objective is to render us as slaves.

Solutions? I do not have specific solutions. I know some things that can be done to slow this down. But beyond the utter destruction of the corporate system I am at a loss. But We The People need not be at a loss. I am not alone. I have my fellow humans to work and strive with to come up with a solution. But first we must wake up and realise the peril of the path we are on. Then with enough minds working on the problem perhaps we can find a solution.

[ProfessorGAC]

87. Why Are They "Leaders"?

Why aren't they our representatives? I have a philsophical problem with the whole notion that elected reps are supposed to be our "leaders". They don't lead me anywhere.

They have a job to represent the best interests of their consituents and the whole of the citizenry. Of course, they've fallen down on the job several times, but i don't look to any of them for leadership. I look for them to do their jobs. That's it.

The right always seem desperate for leadership. The left should be the antithesis of that.
The Professor

[GreenArrow]

93. I agree for the most part

which is why I put "leaders" in quotation marks. And while I would agree that the right is perhaps more directed towards leadership, I would suggest that people in general fall prey to the need for strong leaders to guide them.

I prefer "public servants" to "leaders" though I see precious little of either.

[ProfessorGAC]

111. Then We Agree Completely

It's why kept the quotation marks, as well. I prefer that they think of themselves as representatives of the people. They don't have to serve us. They have to represent our interests.
The Professor

[CWebster]

45. How come, nsma

Kerry would court swing voters and McCain supporters but disdains the Left so much? Why would anyone want to vote for someone when they are continually subject to battering by advocates of that candidate?

[nothingshocksmeanymore]

50. Why not check your own behavior in the matter

I don't think Kerry disdains the left...he can't count on them in spite of his more liberal voting record...in spite of his work on Iran contra...in spite of his BCCI investigation. Why is it Kerry's work from the mid eighties is ancient history when Raplh hasn't accomplished a notable legislative result since the 70's? Is there a double standard there?

Why would anyone treat you seriously when they cannot count on you? Wouldn't they instead go to that portion of the electorate that can be counted on?

Wouldn't they be mindful of electoral politics and realize that what plays in districts around college campuses cannot carry the state?

Do you not see the source of why you are treated with disdain? Is it always due to something independent of you...or did you perhaps cause it?

[CWebster]

58. How come, nsma

you can launch personal attacks on me and get away with it?

It never was my habit to hit the whining button, I guess.

Anywho, I am weary of this argument. Every other post on DU, as well as most Democratic activists express the same discontent with the party. This is no revelation - one does not need to be a purist to have a well-balanced assessment. I think most of the posts here size up the situation well and have come to a realistic, if not somewhat resigned decision without acrimony.

That, it seems to me, is the example to follow.

[nothingshocksmeanymore]

60. Where was ANYTHING I said a personal attack?

I asked you to examine something of import?

It never was my habit to hit the whining button, I guess.

The alert button is there for a reason...if you fail to exercise a known right, why blame me?

and it isn't lost on me that you failed to address a single point I made

[sangh0]

102. I sense more interest in nsma's personal attacks than in the issues

that are being raised. It couldn't be an effort by cwebster to avoid explaining himself, could it?

[Misunderestimator]

68. Most Democratic activists express the same discontent with the party?

Uh.... huh? Why resigned? You must be reading another forum. What I have seen is that most posts indicate an overwhelming support for Kerry and a firm knowledge that the only way to progress is to vote for him.

It's wonderful to contemplate on the perfect system of government where everyone is represented equally. But it's frustrating to keep hearing the same complaints about perfection when we're fighting to just get back what we had before.

[sangh0]

103. This is where

Cwebster asks why you are personally attacking him. That's what he does when questioned about the many ridiculous claims he makes.

[nothingshocksmeanymore]

105. I never realized how debating on point could be so personal

Now I know :D

[Misunderestimator]

112. LOL... Aha... I see

thanks for the heads up :)

[GreenArrow]

43. why do you hate America?

.

[taxidriver]

52. i'll assume that was sarcasm...but it does get annoying to have that be

the typical response when you sway from the party line.

[GreenArrow]

56. it was sarcasm

And yes, it does get annoying.

[taxidriver]

59. i cant remember how many times i've been accused of freep-hood

for saying things that howard dean himself originated (IE, 'If it wasnt for democrats like kerry, we wouldnt be in iraq").

*Sigh*

[GreenArrow]

84. it happens all the time

step outside the established boundaries and get slammed. The big divide is ot between Democrats and Republicans, it's between Corporatists and the rest of us.

[nothingshocksmeanymore]

86. NADER ACCUSES DEMS OF "MINI WATERGATE"

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=102x672911

Do all you Naderites agree with that? Is there any basis in truth? Is there a scintilla of evidence that Dems broke into his office and stole materials? Huh?

Is this a testament to the purity of his integrity?

[Forkboy]

92. You left out some

"They're hiring lawyers to go up to technicalities in places like Arizona, they infiltrated our political convention," Nader, an independent candidate for president, told FOX News on Thursday. "I spoke to John Kerry and said 'you'd better look into it because it could be a mini-Watergate, possibly."

http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,125092,00.html

[nothingshocksmeanymore]

95. wow..hiring a lawyer is illegal and on par with Watergate..who knew?

Infiltrated their convention...how so?

[Forkboy]

100. Just pointing out that you left some out

you seemed so bothered by people's integrity or lack thereof.

[nothingshocksmeanymore]

104. You didn't demonstrate that there was an ounce of truth to the allegations

and I am only bothered by those who operate under the pretense that St Ralph is our savior and one single honest politician when in fact, he is clearly playing dirty pool and lying...why is it people claim hypocrisy and then practice it?

[Forkboy]

110. I dont know,why?

NADER ACCUSES DEMS OF "MINI WATERGATE" possibly

btw,I dont view him as St Ralph,a saviour,or an honest politician

[neverborn]

98. This IS a 2-party system.

"Voting isn't some moral sacrament, it's merely picking the best out of available options for your country."

Now, the available options for president are BUSH or KERRY.

WHO'S BETTER?!?!?

[Az]

106. You are on a train heading towards a cliff

Do you want to speed up or slow down? Thats a two party system.

[wadestock]

108. Sure I agree with all that and more....

but what's that got to do with getting W and the dream team out of power?

Now more than ever it's time for Nader to take a vacation....