babble-intro-img
babble is rabble.ca's discussion board but it's much more than that: it's an online community for folks who just won't shut up. It's a place to tell each other — and the world — what's up with our work and campaigns.

The Race for the US Presidency 2012 & Why Obama Must Be Defeated

106 replies [Last post]

Comments

Bec.De.Corbin
Offline
Joined: Mar 17 2010

 

One of the things I think of are things like how many Supreme Court justices might the president whom wins the next election get to appoint over those 4 years? We do not need a solid conservative majority there that will last for years past these twos careers.

 


Ken Burch
Online
Joined: Feb 26 2005

That is a big issue, and a lot of people who take a "Know Obama in the biblical sense" strategy don't get it(much as Obama, to be fair, often does deserve to be told to get biblically known). 


If Romney gets to make all the SC appointments in the next four years, does anybody think that any sort of resistance to corporate power will still even be possible? 

Those who believe that successful resistance and mobilization for a program of change could go on in a country where the Supreme Court was, say 8 to 1 right wing(a real possibility, btw, since every non conservative jurist on the court other than Elena Kagan and Sonia Sotomayor are in their seventies) need to lay out a clear argument as to how it could be done.

If they can't, they're just asking the most vulnerable people in this country to pretty much slash their political and economic wrists.

Middle-class white lefties who can still afford lattes can afford to settle in for long-term struggles with little if any hope of any actual gains.  Workers, the Rainbow, LGBT people and most women can't.  Most of the most vulnerable people in the U.S. don't have the luxury of hanging in for the long-term.

This is why left third-parties in the U.S. are almost universally middle class, male, and monochrome in their support base.


josh
Offline
Joined: Aug 5 2002
"since every non conservative jurist on the court other than Elena Kagan is in their seventies." Sonia Sotomayor is 58.

Boom Boom
Offline
Joined: Dec 29 2004


NDPP
Offline
Joined: Dec 28 2008

American Autumn (doc)

http://www.occudoc.org/


macktheknife
Offline
Joined: Jun 7 2012

kropotkin1951 wrote:

Here are two news stories from the same day, June 14th.  They highlight why I think Obama should be defeated. His imperialism reeks to the extent that it is impossible to hold ones nose and still be able to mark and X.

Really? But there's no alternative for those on the left. Mittens would have given Shimon Perez the medal and THEN given him a blow job. As long as there is some small semblance of a "left" in America then we should support it, IMV. To do otherwise is to condemn the U.S. AND Canada to conservative win.


Boom Boom
Offline
Joined: Dec 29 2004

Why the Obamacare ruling matters for Canada

excerpt:

In 2004, Paul Martin's government secured a 10-year agreement that set national benchmarks for better health care, in exchange for increased federal funding. In 2014, Stephen Harper's government will simply cut a cheque and walk away.

Without federal leadership, Canada will be left without a health-care system. In its place, in the best case, we will have 13. The Canada Health Act enshrines a federal commitment to public health care, but it must be enforced by Ottawa to be effective. To wit: In 2010, when Quebec signaled its intention to introduce health care user fees, the federal response was silence.


Boom Boom
Offline
Joined: Dec 29 2004

Obama could target Supreme Court if health-care law falls

excerpt:

If the U.S. Supreme Court strikes down Barack Obama's health-care law, Mitt Romney might not be the only adversary the President will be running against this fall. He could also end up campaigning against right-wing judges and their perceived political bias.


Jacob Two-Two
Offline
Joined: Jan 16 2002

Basically, the US is fucked. It is too corrupt, too deluded, too sick. Its democracy is a joke and its economy is hanging by a thread and the few voices pointing this out are far too few and far between to do the slightest bit of good. Like a hard-core addict deeply in denial, there is no chance of intervening or turning things around until they hit rock-bottom. This country is too far gone to be reformed without a major crisis. At this point, it can only collapse. It doesn't make the slightest bit of difference who becomes president. Once the crash comes, and everything that once meant "American" is yanked out from under them, and they are finally left with absolutely no choice but to confront their own insanity and delusions, then they can start to reappraise their place in the world and crawl back to something good. In the meantime, their elections are meaningless. Their politics is mere theatre.


macktheknife
Offline
Joined: Jun 7 2012

Nobody mentions this stuff, and I know it's thread drift, but I for one would like to acknowledge a former babbler, a very prolific poster, and a general all round nice person, Jacob Two Two, has returned to the fold. Welcome back and, well, I  love you, although not in a phyisical way, nevertheless, I hope you never get run over by a bus,  but continue to grace babble with your wisdom.

 


kropotkin1951
Offline
Joined: Jun 6 2002

macktheknife wrote:

kropotkin1951 wrote:

Here are two news stories from the same day, June 14th.  They highlight why I think Obama should be defeated. His imperialism reeks to the extent that it is impossible to hold ones nose and still be able to mark and X.

Really? But there's no alternative for those on the left. Mittens would have given Shimon Perez the medal and THEN given him a blow job. As long as there is some small semblance of a "left" in America then we should support it, IMV. To do otherwise is to condemn the U.S. AND Canada to conservative win.

Thanks but I have spent 40 years here in Canada being told my support of the NDP was just as stupid and harmful to the progressive cause.  I disagree and note that the third party in Canada that is not controlled by the corporate world is now the second party and knocking on the doors of power.  If all us fools had agreed with your logic Canada would be stuck with the Con Lib duality that is the same as your Rep Dem duality. 

There is no short term fix to the problem but if I was a US progressive I would be working to build for the future success of a better party.


macktheknife
Offline
Joined: Jun 7 2012

kropotkin1951 wrote:

 

There is no short term fix to the problem but if I was a US progressive I would be working to build for the future success of a better party.

But your short term fix is to allow mitt romney the white house. That is progressive? There is no alternative, realistically speaking, so not voting for Obama is a vote for Romney. Is that what you want?


macktheknife
Offline
Joined: Jun 7 2012

I understand the whole `punish the pseudo progressive for their transgressions`thing but allowing Romney to take the White House to spite Obama and the Democrats is wrong headed in my opinion.


macktheknife
Offline
Joined: Jun 7 2012

Remember that conservative ideology spreads, and in the case of North America it spreads north. Lets not support that.


Boom Boom
Offline
Joined: Dec 29 2004

Voting for Romney - or abstaining from voting altogether - to spite Obama - is like cutting off your nose to spite your face.


macktheknife
Offline
Joined: Jun 7 2012

Well, I don`t think Kropotkin was advocating voting for Romney, but since there is no alternative, not voting for Obama is effectively a vote for Romney.


macktheknife
Offline
Joined: Jun 7 2012

Well, I don`t think Kropotkin was advocating voting for Romney, but since there is no alternative, not voting for Obama is effectively a vote for Romney.


macktheknife
Offline
Joined: Jun 7 2012

wth


kropotkin1951
Offline
Joined: Jun 6 2002

 Support Trudeau or the right will win and we'll get wage controls. Liberals brought them in.  Support Chretien or we will get NAFTA.  Liberals got in and we still got NAFTA.  Support Martin or the Reform will get in and destroy social programs.  Liberals won and Martin showed the world how to balance budgets on the backs of workers.

I've heard it for forty years from our Liberals in Canada.  Same old mantra from the same old parties that are tied to the corporate boardrooms.  You can call it progressive but I never have and never will.  The difference between your politics and ours is that people in Canada on the left never bought that bullshit and against the odds have steadily kept making electoral gains.  Those include numerous provincial governments and now the Official Opposition and government in waiting of our federal government.  If we had listened to your logic those successes would not exist. and we would still be voting for the lesser of evils running on behalf of their corporate masters.


NDPP
Offline
Joined: Dec 28 2008

you still are. They still are..


kropotkin1951
Offline
Joined: Jun 6 2002

NDPP wrote:

you still are. They still are..

Laughing Wink

But we have more choice. 

The real problem in the US elections is the fact that they can be bought and sold legally.  Your politicians of both the donkey and elephant variety spend more time begging for money from rich people than they do meeting with constituents to solve problems.  There is no democracy in your current system and voting for either party will not change that.


kropotkin1951
Offline
Joined: Jun 6 2002

Boom Boom wrote:

Meanwhile:

Obama is a a real man of the people a fundraiser for him only costs $40,000.  Imagine a system where they spent their time listening to normal people instead of going to fundraisers to give access to people who can afford to pay for it.  Fundraising is the main job of American politicians not consultation and policy development to fix problems and enhance the public good.  I love it, a lottery to determine who can speak to politicians seeking votes.  It at least highlights that the odds of any regular citizen getting the politicos ear are the same as the odds of winning enough in the  lottery to retire on.

Quote:

The 150-person event, held Thursday night, brought in $15 million, from both ticket prices -- $40,000 per person -- and donations of $3 or more that entered donors into a raffle to win tickets to the event, according to the Los Angeles Times. Tens of thousands of donors contributed an average of $23 in hopes of winning a ticket, the LA Times reported, raising almost $10 million for the campaign.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/05/11/george-clooney-obama_n_1508850....


macktheknife
Offline
Joined: Jun 7 2012

Well then what do you suggest? Not vote for Obama nor Romney, but some other candidate, perhaps Nader. Result Romney. Maybe we should hold the Democrats accountable, force them to be what they purport to be. Not vote. Or vote for some independant.

You know, on second thought, I may agree with you Kropotkin. After all if it makes no difference which party is elected, and that seems to be a given, then why reward the Democrats. Let the chips fall where they may. I understand now. As long as we support a party regaedless of what they do, then nothing will change. We`ve lived through con governments before, lets hold our leftist governments feet to the fire. Thanks Kropotkin.


NDPP
Offline
Joined: Dec 28 2008

"...What Americans refuse to acknowledge, is that to vote for either the Democratic or Republican nominee for president later this year is to vote for these horrors. It is to SUPPORT them..." - Arthur Silber, Ordinary Evil; 'Just Admit that You're Voting for Hitler, Okay?'

http://rabble.ca/comment/1309271

 


Mr.Tea
Offline
Joined: Jul 9 2011

Boom Boom wrote:

A friend suggested the Democrats hold a 'beans and franks' dinner across the road from the Romney event. Laughing

Obama holds fundraisers at George Clonney's Hollywood mansion for 40 grand a ticket and at the editor of |Vogue's luxury Manhattan apartment for the same amount. Both candidates are being bought and paid for.


Boom Boom
Offline
Joined: Dec 29 2004

Ken Burch wrote:

 


If Romney gets to make all the SC appointments in the next four years, does anybody think that any sort of resistance to corporate power will still even be possible? 

Right on. A pox on those who think it makes no difference whether Romney or Obama get in.


kropotkin1951
Offline
Joined: Jun 6 2002

You make the absurd presumption that Obama will appoint judges who oppose corporate power.  Rest assured that while he is likely to appoint judges that have a firm commitment to individual rights and that is a good thing he is never going to appoint judges that will limit the powers of his corporate backers who pay the bills. Health care proves that point in spades. 

He instituted a health care program that was more flawed than Romney enacted in his state. Obama's plan actually sold out to corporations more and Democrats are trying to sell it as a progressive package while vilifying Romney as a the devil incarnate.  He is a politician who will do exactly as his puppet masters say he should. Can anyone really say Obama will do differently, after his three and a half years?

Will Romney's kill lists be longer or shorter? I don't know and frankly don't care because when either does it is a war crime no matter whether the number is two, twenty or two hundred a week.


Jacob Two-Two
Offline
Joined: Jan 16 2002

macktheknife wrote:

Nobody mentions this stuff, and I know it's thread drift, but I for one would like to acknowledge a former babbler, a very prolific poster, and a general all round nice person, Jacob Two Two, has returned to the fold. Welcome back and, well, I  love you, although not in a phyisical way, nevertheless, I hope you never get run over by a bus,  but continue to grace babble with your wisdom.

 

 

Well, gee, thanks mack. Though it's funny to hear someone tell me how nice I am on the heels of such a nasty post, I appreciate it.


macktheknife
Offline
Joined: Jun 7 2012

Boom Boom wrote:

 

Right on. A pox on those who think it makes no difference whether Romney or Obama get in.

I know it may seem strange considering my previous posts but I am nothing if not flexible, and I think Kropotkin has a huge point.

What if the NDP became a NATO warmongering, tax cutting government if elected. Would we continue to support them "as the only alternative"? I think Kropotkin may be right; even though he didn`t say it directly, we as progressives need to draw a line in the sand.

If that line is crossed we won`t continue to support you because you`re the best alternative. Continuing to support a party after they fail to represent their contintuency would be a pox on us all I think.


macktheknife
Offline
Joined: Jun 7 2012

Sorry Jacob, I didn`t mean it to be nasty, just my twisted sense of humor.

Really after re-reading that post I must say I apologize, as it was no where near what I was attempting to convey. I truly feel you are a valuable member of babble and genuinely laud your return.


Comment viewing options

Select your preferred way to display the comments and click "Save settings" to activate your changes.
Login or register to post comments