"I think many of the intelligent simply vote no by not showing up on election days."
It is their right to do so, but they are wrong to do so.
Peter
What A Tangled Web We Weave...
#42
Posted 2007-April-09, 17:33
Winstonm, on Apr 9 2007, 05:25 PM, said:
Does anyone actually believe that in the U.S. a grassroots organization could eventually win the WH with a third-party candidate?
The truth as I see it is that we are given two alternatives for president, Scumbag A or Scumbag B, and intelligence has nothing to do with which scumbag wins.
Only 6 corporations own nearly 100% of the media in the U.S. - is there any wonder why all we get from MSM is spin based on owenership viewpoint? Which scumbag candidate looks best depends on the spin of the channel you happen to be watching at the time.
I think many of the intelligent simply vote no by not showing up on election days. And many think "the government we deserve" is impossible to achieve.
The truth as I see it is that we are given two alternatives for president, Scumbag A or Scumbag B, and intelligence has nothing to do with which scumbag wins.
Only 6 corporations own nearly 100% of the media in the U.S. - is there any wonder why all we get from MSM is spin based on owenership viewpoint? Which scumbag candidate looks best depends on the spin of the channel you happen to be watching at the time.
I think many of the intelligent simply vote no by not showing up on election days. And many think "the government we deserve" is impossible to achieve.
Ahh ok we are all victims, I knew it was someone's fault. Now I can blame the darn system and feel helpless and victimized.
#43
Posted 2007-April-09, 17:34
pbleighton, on Apr 9 2007, 05:33 PM, said:
"I think many of the intelligent simply vote no by not showing up on election days."
It is their right to do so, but they are wrong to do so.
Peter
It is their right to do so, but they are wrong to do so.
Peter
Heck if they do not show up to vote, just makes my vote count more. Hmm some may say that is a bad thing.
#44
Posted 2007-April-09, 17:36
pbleighton, on Apr 9 2007, 05:19 PM, said:
"It just seems if he is a war criminal, then the voters got what they deserve. They did not vote for impeachment with the 2006 election. They either disagree with you or are too stupid to know he is one."
How does the result of an election change guilt or innocence under the Geneva Conventions?
Presumably you can supply the historical parallels yourself.
Peter
How does the result of an election change guilt or innocence under the Geneva Conventions?
Presumably you can supply the historical parallels yourself.
Peter
ok your evidence overwhelms me, he is a war criminal and we(me) are just too lazy to impeach him. Sort of like the people who lived in Germany just outside the Concentration camps and said, "What the heck who knew, I thought the Jews liked it here."
#45
Posted 2007-April-09, 17:47
Quote
Ahh ok we are all victims, I knew it was someone's fault. Now I can blame the darn system and feel helpless and victimized
I don't feel victimized. Only a few times in history have the powerful been challenged, and I don't expect it to happen again anytime soon. So I adapt to what is real.
A good friend of mine quoted a favorite of his Sicilian mother: Peter, she said, there is what is right, and there is what is real. You have to deal with what is real.
She would also say, Sometimes you're the hammer; sometimes you're the anvil; and you have to know which time is which.
Understanding powerlessness does not equate to victimization. You can be a victim if you want; I happen to realize right now I am the anvil and that is what is real.
"Injustice anywhere is a threat to justice everywhere." Black Lives Matter. / "I need ammunition, not a ride." Zelensky