tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4867113147194082160.post5091149563562712070..comments2024-01-27T07:32:09.377-05:00Comments on Flaming Fundamentalists For Peace: Revolution Today Or Death TomorrowCurt Dayhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/06086508660386800294noreply@blogger.comBlogger7125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4867113147194082160.post-60980950328855828182008-06-23T11:44:00.000-04:002008-06-23T11:44:00.000-04:00You cite pride and self-interest as the reasons fo...You cite pride and self-interest as the reasons for my position and yet you say you are not trying to shame me. Add to that you say that, if I feel shame it is my fault.<BR/><BR/>In addition, the problems we have are mostly the responsibility of the republicans and not the democrats and yet on another blog you said something to the effect that you were not a loyal democrat.<BR/>And add to that that if it isn't the fault of the Republicans, it is the fault of Hussein who killed all Iraqis who died during the sanction years. BTW, there is too much documentation stating otherwise including the admission of former Secretary of State, Madeline Albright.<BR/><BR/>These things don't add up to conclude that you are merely using simple logic. <BR/><BR/>See, you are blaming everyone but yourself and the people you support. If you blame the neocons, realize that they are not significantly different from those in the Kennedy Administration. America has had an empire problem long before the neocons came to power. For example, historian Chalmers Johnson explains the difference between Clinton and Bush is in the kind of empire they were maintaining. Please Historian William Blum cites the large number of people who were killed during Clinton's Presidency. <BR/><BR/>So your logic does not add up. In fact, it was the same logic that was employed in 2000 and 2004. It is the same old, same old. It states that we can't afford to vote for people based on position because that will elect people with positions we can't afford. This is despite the fact that much of the incentive for the 9-11 attack came during the Clinton Administration.<BR/><BR/>Now here is the deal, continue with personal characterizations and your notes will not be posted. Stay with the subject and they will.Curt Dayhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/06086508660386800294noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4867113147194082160.post-5169480547246602982008-06-23T08:32:00.000-04:002008-06-23T08:32:00.000-04:00I am not trying to shame you - is that why you're ...I am not trying to shame you - is that why you're so resistant to the simple logic of my argument? But if you feel shame, then maybe you understand the merits of what I'm saying.<BR/><BR/>These may not be as extreme times as you would prefer to actually have a 3rd party candidate be viable, but getting there would be extremely painful for the majority of us. By voting "for" McCain you are enabling the neocons and pushing us closer to ruin and despair average Americans. Are you hoping the country suffers more than we need to just to serve your political interests? We have to do penance? My kids?<BR/><BR/>BTW I don't think you should be dismissing Obama as an alternative to McCain - they are quite different.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4867113147194082160.post-23917652220793540182008-06-22T15:14:00.000-04:002008-06-22T15:14:00.000-04:00I did forget one point. Hussein did kill his share...I did forget one point. Hussein did kill his share of people. But when our country bombs the infrastructure so that there is limited electrical, water, and sewage services and then enforces economic sanctions that even interferes with the rebuilding of that infrastructure and even the buying of medicine as well as bombs the country every 3 days--as was done from Dec '98 to Dec '99--then our country shares a great deal of responsibility for the suffering that went on in Iraq. While you can blame Hussein simply because he was an evil man, the details of what happened in Iraq point as many fingers at us as at him.Curt Dayhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/06086508660386800294noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4867113147194082160.post-80052947459561790292008-06-22T15:05:00.000-04:002008-06-22T15:05:00.000-04:00First, if these are extreme times, then extreme ac...First, if these are extreme times, then extreme actions would not include doing the same-old, same-old of voting for the lesser of two evils.<BR/><BR/>Second, you haven't shown either pride or self-interest. That is a subjective analysis on your part.<BR/><BR/>Third, there is no "buying-in" to an excuse. Time and logic tells us that the planning for 9-11 occurred during the Clinton Presidency and the anger behind it was fueled by history of which little included the Bush Presidency. The Bush Presidency is guilty for the negligence of ignoring the threat but not for inspiring the action. <BR/><BR/>And when one hears the reasons given for these attacks, one only needs to examine them in the light of history to see if 1) the historical references are true; and 2) if the points are reasonable. I don't see any problem with either point. <BR/><BR/>Finally, it seems that you would like people to feel compelled to agree with you or feel shame for not doing so. That is not promoting democracy nor is your labeling people who disagree as being proud or selfish scoring any logical points. It seems that you are only out to manipulate.Curt Dayhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/06086508660386800294noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4867113147194082160.post-26530511336266330092008-06-22T12:45:00.000-04:002008-06-22T12:45:00.000-04:00Extreme times demand extreme actions. In this cas...Extreme times demand extreme actions. In this case, "extreme" for you needs to include swallowing your pride and self interest for the greater good by voting for Obama. <BR/><BR/>You cannot say that McCain would be a better choice than Obama. The perspective that you'll vote for the candidate that best represents you is made meaningless by the reality that if you vote for anyone but Obama, you are facilitating McCain's election. You cannot deny this. Your arguments have no basis in reality. The "long term good" argument is also meaningless because of the possibility of 4 or 8 more neocon years trashing the constitution even further, and solidifying their power structure - making the possibility of a viable 3rd party candidacy even more remote. <BR/><BR/>BTW, the democrats are far less responsible for 9-11 that our republican controlled oil interests in the middle east and they were not the only ones supporting sanctions. Hussein killed those people and blamed us - and you're buying into that. Brilliant.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4867113147194082160.post-11360541781159278982008-06-14T23:23:00.000-04:002008-06-14T23:23:00.000-04:00I disagree for the following reason. Voting agains...I disagree for the following reason. Voting against Bush rather than voting for someone who reflects one's views maintained the duopoly of the Them and Not Them parties. Thus all each party needs to do to "earn" our votes is to prove that they are not the other party. But with acceptance of their difference from the other party comes acceptance of their baggage as well. <BR/><BR/>And as we accept more and more of their baggage, we have enabled the two parties to become more and more like each other. This is because much of their baggage centers on their dependence on corporations and thus commitment to corporation interests. <BR/><BR/>This commitment to vote for the Democratic nominee simply because their candidates have the "only" chance at beating the Republicans allows the Democrats to act as if they own their voters rather than being owned by their voters. So you don't get the Republicans, we will get the Democrats who maintained policies towards Iraq that caused the UNSCOM inspectors to be evicted from Iraq as well as the maintaining the sanctions that were responsible for the deaths of hundreds of thousands of Iraqis. This last fact, btw, was one of 3 stated reasons for 9-11.Curt Dayhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/06086508660386800294noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4867113147194082160.post-92231233996388750902008-06-14T14:28:00.000-04:002008-06-14T14:28:00.000-04:00They didn't not vote for Nader "because they were ...They didn't not vote for Nader "because they were democrats". They voted for Kerry because they were smart enough to see the pointlessness of voting for Nader and the fact that Nader's run would facilitate another four years of the worst government we've ever seen. It did and we are (almost) all paying dearly.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.com