Diatribune - vlog entry - Comments

Thank God for Jon Stewart!

epppie — Thu, 04 Sep 2008 13:28:36 -0600

Thank God for Jon Stewart!

Thanks for your input,

epppie — Sat, 30 Aug 2008 11:02:40 -0600

Thanks for your input, especially your thoughts on what kinds of numbers we would need to have for Americans to be ready for real change.

I think it's dangerous to do the kind of mental experiments where we imagine the Gore we've seen in public life over the last 8 years in office instead of Bush. We have to remember that Democrats have a very unfortunate tendency to act completely differently in private life than they do when in official capacities. Carter's a sterling example. In office, he backed Somoza in NIcaragua and the mujahadeen in Afganistan. He started some of the most heinous messes of the past 30 years. But as a private citizen, he's been something like a saint.

I don't believe Gore would have been much better than Bush. He might have been worse. Yeah, I know that's hard to imagine, but we tend to look back on the Clinton years with rose colored glasses. Clinton did nothing about Rwanda and did nothing about Serbia until devastation had been going on for years and then his answer was to bomb the hell out of Serbia, that is out of the civilian population of Serbia. It IS possible that Gore would have been more brutal and misguided than Bush. A lot of things Bush has done were in the works under Clinton.

For me, the election math comes down to this: I'm only one person. I can only be responsible for my vote. I've reached the point where I'm done with what I see as The Two Parties That Are Really One. My choices are not to vote, or to vote for Nader. If Obama somehow manages to change my mind between now and November, I guess I'll vote for him.

IF enough people feel the way I do, a movement will build. That movement could be the beginning of change. IF it's big enough, it could even put Nader in the White House. Maybe you are right about the 8% unemployment. And we may see that before Novemeber. But the way I see it, no one can know for sure when the People are ready for change. What will be the turning point.

Who could have predicted Cindy Sheehan? Least of all her, right? But apparently she knew just one thing - that she had to TRY to make a difference. I think that's what keeps Nader running. I used to think his ego was out of control. But I don't think that anymore.

I totally understand your

kerry — Sat, 30 Aug 2008 10:33:11 -0600

I totally understand your point of view. I really do and I agree with most of it. I wish I could agree that ANY third candidate could get elected. I also think most Americans may feel that way as well. The system is SO corrupt. I just can't see it at this time. BTW, I think that Gore lost the election much to his own devices. But Nader did not help things. Nader even said in an interview that he thought that if his candidacy helped put Bush in office he was ok with that because he believed things had to get much worse before Americans would support real change. I actually agreed with that observation, but I don't think we are there yet, as bad as things seem. I don't think Americans are ready for real change. We would need about an 8% unemployment rate or higher and runaway inflation. I mean look 80% of Americans believe the country is on the wrong track and this race is still a dead heat. What does that say about our appetite for any kind of change? I am going to be out of touch for a couple of days. Talk with you when I get back

I think it's really silly to

epppie — Sat, 30 Aug 2008 10:18:50 -0600

I think it's really silly to keep blaming Nader. It's been 8 years since 2000. 8 years of blaming Nader. If you can't see how silly that is, Kerry, I just don't know how to show you. And I'm not trying to be nasty. I wish I COULD figure out how to show you, because if I could show you, then maybe I could show a lot of other people who think they have no choice but to vote for the Dems.

As for what Nader stands for, I think he's far more articulate and correct in his views than Obama or McCain. For more. Not even close. Not even close to close. When it comes to policy, they are in the minor leagues and he's Babe Ruth, by comparison.

I mean, come on, Nader is a pillar of progressivism. You know who pisses me off? It's not Nader. It's people like Chomsky, who sit on the sidelines and criticize, but never jump into the fray. At least Nader is trying to bring about change, real change, not Obamian fake change.

I agree with you that progressives need to build a party from the ground up, but until then, what we can do to show that we want a progressive party is stop voting for Democrats. Yeah, so locally Baron Hill might lose to Mike Sodrell. So what? Not only is there very little difference between the two, but Baron Hill is a key player amongst the Blue Dogs, which makes him a key guy for the Republicans, a key guy in helping the Republicans tie up Congress for two years. Losing him for Sodrell would actually be a net gain for Democrats.

And look what we could gain. If enough people start voting against BOTH the Pubs and the Dems, a new party could be a reality by the next election cycle.

Progressives need to stop voting out of fear. That kind of least-worsting over the past 30 years is what has landed us in the Hell we are in now. The longer we continue to blame Nader, the longer it will take, in my opinion, for us to realize that our own fears are at fault.

And I don't think it's out of the question that Nader could win in November. Unlike a lot of people, I think Obama's as big a clown as McCain is. I'm sorry if that's offensive to your feelings about Obama, Kerry, and to anyone else's, but that's just how I see him.
And I think there's a good chance that the clown fight between now and November will open enough folks' eyes to how ridiculous the Two Parties That Are Really One Kabuki is. I mean, as entertainment, it's fine. It's a good laugh. But when it comes to actually voting, I'm planning to vote for the only candidate who knows what the hell he's talking about (in my view) - Nader.

Thanks. But that's what I

epppie — Sat, 30 Aug 2008 09:56:29 -0600

Thanks. But that's what I did. I must have somehow missed part of the URL or something.

I am not sure what Nader

kerry — Sat, 30 Aug 2008 09:45:22 -0600

I am not sure what Nader stands for anymore other than Nader. I would love to see a truly progressive third party emerge in this country, but I am not hopeful. In the meantime a vote for Nader is a vote for McCain. If I am not mistaken Nader pulled 8% in Florida in 2000. That and Gore running the worst campaign in memory gave the White House to Bush. I know that there are not substantial differences between the parties, they both sell out to corporate America. But there are small differences that ultimately matter. Until progressives get together and fully commit to building a party from the ground up, we are stuck with the democrats such as they are.

eppie, There are two ways to

kerry — Sat, 30 Aug 2008 09:37:28 -0600

eppie,
There are two ways to use the vlog to load a video. You can place the embed code in the large text box like most other sites,or if you only load one, I prefer to paste the compete URL in the small text box under "video". This will work for mostother video sites besides YouTube. Anyway it is up now and you can edit and look at what I did.

I don't know why my video

epppie — Sat, 30 Aug 2008 07:37:12 -0600

I don't know why my video doesn't show up, but it's at the link that does show up - Ralph Nader talking about the differences and non-differences between the Pubs and Dems.

I listened on the radio and

epppie — Fri, 29 Aug 2008 08:34:37 -0600

I listened on the radio and I thought it was one of the worst acceptance speeches I've heard. I thought it was boilerplate from beginning to end and had no force or thrust to it.

Obama does have a good speaking voice. If that were sufficient to be a good orator, he'd be a fine one.

Well said.

epppie — Thu, 28 Aug 2008 05:14:52 -0600

Well said.

The Convention of Refusés

Jacob Freeze — Wed, 27 Aug 2008 20:17:14 -0600

The Convention of Refusés is an excellent idea, and if reality broke through for a millisecond, almost everybody would be there.

Amy Goodman's has a good interview here with Rick MacArthur, who just wrote “You Can’t Be President: The Outrageous Barriers to Democracy in America”

Virtually none of us have a chance to get elected to anything ever, or even interact with anyone who ever got elected to anything, so we're all "refusés," and we deserve to have our own convention!

The politics would probably be as much better than the major parties as the art at the original Salon des Refusés was better than "official" French art in 1863.

Maybe we could have a political party that was more like this...

And less like this...

That' s all great, except

epppie — Wed, 27 Aug 2008 16:42:56 -0600

That' s all great, except that Obama is going to spend more on the military and get us into more wars.

I'd like to see a Convention de Refuses (like the Salons de Refuses of the Impressionists) and I'd like to see Kucinich there.

I tried watching this

T Ann — Sun, 23 Mar 2008 22:11:08 -0600

I tried watching this yesterday, and I couldn't stop laughing. Well, at least they have heart!

Good speech. So what. He

lcsartori — Tue, 18 Mar 2008 17:07:42 -0600

Good speech. So what. He still likes Wright. He says Wright is family. Well, his family hates my family. I don't like it. I don't want an Obama Nation.
Where is that white grandmother of his?
He certainly comes from a broken family. No wonder he looks to Wright as family. But that is not acceptable for a president of the U.S.

I think it's a mistake to

Jacob Freeze — Tue, 18 Mar 2008 07:56:21 -0600

I think it's a mistake to compare John Kerry's service in Vietnam, riding a plastic boat up and down the Mekong River, exposed to enemy machine gun and rocket attacks every day...

I think it's a mistake to compare John Kerry on the Mekong River to Barack Obama sitting in the same church for 20 years while the pastor screams "God damn America!" and the congregation cheers.

There is no way to "get on top of this." Obama invents one lie after another... "I wasn't there," I never heard of it"... and it just gets worse.

Nominating Obama is a prescription for suicide for the Democratic Party.