Acceptably Wicked

Dec 31, 2008 12:59

There is no difference between the policies of Clinton and Bush, nor are there between Bush and Obama's.  The two parties are simply speaking two corporations looking out for the interests of their investors with puppets spouting rhetoric to garner support from an ignorant public that never seems to realize that neither party supports the ideals ( Read more... )

Leave a comment

Comments 9

(The comment has been removed)

redwoodpecker December 31 2008, 21:39:38 UTC
Didn't I lay out specific examples? I did right? What makes you think he'll vote differently when he's president?

My point is clear. I can point out multiple instances of him voting against our interests. Where are your specific examples? Or is it all just hope?

Reply

(The comment has been removed)

redwoodpecker January 5 2009, 16:04:15 UTC
It's very simple, I have solid examples of why he's a piece of shit, whereas you have blind faith that ultimately he'll be a better president. Then when he is you'll say he's trying but congress is working against him, or that he really wants to do better but things were too fucked up by the republicans, or any number of arguments that republicans presented when they were defending Bush. It's a very effective system. There's no difference between the two except that their rhetoric appeals to different people on an emotional level and creates blind support.

Reply


guinnevere_b January 1 2009, 05:53:18 UTC
Well, I agree, but I'm still hoping against hope that Obama's merely been hiding behind his Secret Identity of Right-leaning Senator, scamming the fascists to get within firing distance before revealing himself as Progressive Man: faster than a venal Congress, more powerful than the military-industrial complex, able to restore the Bill of Rights in a single pen-stroke...

But you and I both know I'm whistling past the cemetery. The MSM would NEVER have endorsed anyone who wasn't a bona fide member of the pod people: they may look liberal, and they may talk liberal, but under all the layers of play-acting they're part of the fascist machine and they're going to make us all very, very sorry.

...Okay: sorrier.

Reply

redwoodpecker January 5 2009, 16:11:07 UTC
Very succinctly put and I agree absolutely. Especially the most important point, which is that he never would have gotten the position if he wasn't a part of the machine. I know people still like to think they have some sort of choice but the choices they have are aesthetic at best.

It was an appropriate analogy as well seeing as I think the chances of Obama turning out to be a progressive leader representing real change are about as good as the chances that he'll suddenly develop heat vision and super strength.

Reply


madamealexis January 1 2009, 19:38:36 UTC

... )

Reply

redwoodpecker January 5 2009, 16:11:46 UTC
Let's hope so ;)

Reply


Leave a comment

Up