[Peace-discuss] [sf-core] What are the chances?

[C. G. Estabrook]

You're saying this in defense of a national leader who kills children at any age?


On Sep 2, 2012, at 7:37 PM, Jenifer Cartwright <jencart13 at yahoo.com> wrote:

> 
> No comparison on reproductive issues, care for dependent children, etc. Current Republican thinking is that value as a person begins at conception and ends at birth. 
> 
> --- On Sun, 9/2/12, Germaine Light <lightport at sbcglobal.net> wrote:
> 
> Women's intuition!  
> ....as in freedom of choice & respect for women's bodies...equal rights at work......gay rights....Romney Definitely on the wrong side of this......Obama MUCH better!
> 
> 
> Sent from my iPhone
> Germaine 
> 
> On Sep 2, 2012, at 4:16 PM, "C. G. Estabrook" <cge at shout.net> wrote:
> 
>> Where's your evidence for that? 
>> 
>> He advertised his ability to cozen and mislead popular enthusiasms (like the '60s anti-war movement) in "The Audacity of Hope." (He called it "restoring people's trust in the government," which he said had been lost by the Vietnam war - but not by changing the war policy.)
>> 
>> He gave a practical example in 2008 when he quite consciously co-opted the anti-war movement. People voted for him thinking he would end the war (as they gave Democrats control of Congress in 2006 under the same misapprehension). He didn't give that impression by accident, and of course he immediately betrayed it in office (as Nixon did when he ran against the Democrats' war in 1968).
>> 
>> On Sep 2, 2012, at 4:00 PM, Germaine Light <lightport at sbcglobal.net> wrote:
>> 
>>> 
>>> A lot bigger chance that Obama would listen to those in the streets!
>>> 
>>> Sent from my iPhone
>>> Germaine 
>>> 
>>> On Sep 2, 2012, at 3:52 PM, "C. G. Estabrook" <cge at shout.net> wrote:
>>> 
>>>>  
>>>> Although I won't vote for either one of them, it's not at all clear to me whether a Romney or an Obama presidency would add more to the sum of human happiness, since they both profess the same murderous economic and military policies (for all their efforts at product differentiation).
>>>> 
>>>> Obama's re-election cannot avoid being interpreted as approval of those policies (cf. Little Bush's "political capital" in 2004), while Romney's election might be seen as their rejection, despite his protestations.
>>>> 
>>>> Perhaps, like FDR in 1932, a victorious Romney may be driven to reverse his professed positions, if the popular demand is strong enough. Politics is in the streets, not the ballot box.
>>>> 
>>> 
>>> __._,_.___
>>> Reply via web post                       	 Reply to sender                        	 Reply to group                        	Start a New Topic           	Messages in this topic (2)                       
>>> RECENT ACTIVITY:
>>> Visit Your Group
>>> Switch to: Text-Only, Daily Digest • Unsubscribe • Terms of Use • Send us Feedback 
>>> .
>>>  
>>> __,_._,___
>> 
> 
> -----Inline Attachment Follows-----
> 
> _______________________________________________
> Peace-discuss mailing list
> Peace-discuss at lists.chambana.net
> http://lists.chambana.net/mailman/listinfo/peace-discuss
> _______________________________________________
> Peace-discuss mailing list
> Peace-discuss at lists.chambana.net
> http://lists.chambana.net/mailman/listinfo/peace-discuss

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.chambana.net/pipermail/peace-discuss/attachments/20120902/4755cc63/attachment.html>