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

Mon Sep 3 15:33:22 UTC 2012

Agree w/ everything you said, Mike... and Dude, you can WRITE!! Yeah, folks correctly faulted evil Madeline Albright for her "collateral damage" remark ... and then the oh so pure of heart and mind on- and off this list do the same.    

--- On Mon, 9/3/12, Mike Lehman <rebelmike at earthlink.net> wrote:

    Jenifer,

      I tend to vote _for_ people, not against them, despite our bogus
      democracy often turning on how much crap can be thrown at one or
      the other of two poor choices that basically propose doing little
      to nothing to alter an abusive, corrupt, and ultimately
      illegitimate political-economic system.

      Yes, in Illinois it hardly matters who you vote for individually.,
      Obama has the state sewn up. In other states, it doesn't matter,
      because they're packed with yahoos struggling to drag us back to
      the 19th century -- and hoping Romney will do that. There are
      other choices on the ballot, some worth considering in comparison
      to One-of-the-Inevitable-Pair. 

      And you can always just skip that ballot line entirely, although
      that's a bit of a cop-out with the top of the ticket and with
      what's at stake for some in how the results turns out. Thus if I
      was in a swing state, it would be a tougher choice. I might even
      vote for Obama, because I do think he's somewhat less toxic for
      the average citizen than Romney. It would really depend on my mood
      going in to vote that day, as at least in a swing state there is
      what amounts to a choice, as narrow as it might be. For all
      Obama's many faults, if one compares him to Romney, most are an
      order of magnitude less poisonous than Romney's.

      Iran is a good example. If Romney was president right now, we'd
      probably be deeply involved in the mess that unleashing Israel to
      do as Netanyahoo wants will bring on. Obama has certainly been an
      enabler of the current regime in Tel Aviv, but also a (somewhat)
      restraining influence. Will the US turnaround and give Israel the
      green light to go ahead and attack Iran, even with Obama?
      Possibly, but even that is a faint ray of sunshine in comparison
      to the total eclipse of humanity that Romney would facilitate.

      That's just one issue, but we all know there are many more.
      Certainly not much basis to vote for Obama, but yes, there is a
      difference and one worth considering -- if your vote might be made
      in a jurisdiction where it could tip the scales.

      I usually stay out of these arguments, because I don't see them as
      worthwhile in changing much. But if I had to pick the time of the
      year to be dropped, naked and without food, tools or protection
      into the US political wilderness, I'd rather it be in an Obama
      spring than a Romney fall. At least with Obama I'd have a chance
      to eat, make shelter and figure out how to survive the coming
      winter. With Romney, we'll all simply soon freeze to death, which
      might be the most humane of the many ways in which a Romney
      presidency will abuse most of the population.

      Mike Lehman

      On 9/3/2012 12:24 AM, Jenifer Cartwright wrote:

            Excellent post,
              Mike, was seconding yr every word until the last bit. Why
              won't you be voting for Obama? I'm too scared to do
              otherwise. I'm assuming y're an IL resident? Would you
              vote for Obama if you lived in e g MO-WI-OH-IN,FL, and if
              not, why not? 

              --- On Sun, 9/2/12, Mike Lehman <rebelmike at earthlink.net>
              wrote:
                As a historian, in my opinion I
                  think you're drawing the wrong analogy from 1932. If
                  Romney wins, it will be as if Hoover won in 1932 --
                  and then you can hope all you want about the people
                  having any impact on his greed and lust for power.

                  Frankly, I wouldn't take much in the way of political
                  advice from the NY Times anyway. I read it regularly,
                  just as I listen to what the president has to say from
                  time to time. Do I invest in either? Are you
                  kidding?!?

                  Douthat's puppy love for Ryan, the "policy
                  entrepreneur" kind of makes me want to puke. Serial
                  greed freak, maybe. Policy presumes it at least
                  benefits the public and nothing I've seen from Romney
                  is anything more than the Pig of Greed wearing Sarah
                  Palin's lipstick.

                  Two bad choices? Don't presume that they're equally
                  bad, which seems to be the point of the argument that
                  it's no skin off anyone's knee if Romney happens to
                  manage to buy the presidency this time around. Give
                  those jerks another shot at packing the Supremes and
                  Carl will likely be scratching out marks on a prison
                  wall along with other thought criminals, even though
                  he and Romney probably do agree on abortion. I've yet
                  to figure out how folks that claim to believe in small
                  government want it to be just the size to forcibly fit
                  in the womb. The present situation, while it may gall
                  some, at least leaves these decisions to a woman's
                  conscience, where it should be. I have yet to figure
                  out how some people seem to talk to god enough to
                  claim to know what s/he thinks on this matter, which
                  is likely to be a lot more complicated than a
                  Republican platform plank.

                  Not that I trust Obama more than a cup of warm spit on
                  much of anything. But there are two possibilities of
                  who wins in November and I know which one I'd prefer
                  to have to put up with given that bad hand, even
                  though I won't be voting for him.

                  Mike Lehman

                  On 9/2/2012 7:02 PM, C. G. Estabrook wrote:

                  > Ross Douthout has a column in the NYT today in
                  which he too draws a comparison with 1932:

                  > 

                  > <http://www.nytimes.com/2012/09/02/opinion/sunday/douthat-franklin-delano-romney.html>.

                  > 

                  > 

                  > On Sep 2, 2012, at 4:29 PM, "Brussel, Morton K"
                  <brussel at illinois.edu>
                  wrote:

                  > 

                  >> On Sep 2, 2012, at 3:52 PM, C. G. Estabrook
                  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.

                  >>> 

                  >> I think not. If such be the case, it [Obama
                  winning] will result from a confused guess by the
                  voting electorate that given the alternatives, Romney
                  and company would offer less than Obama, while
                  following basically the same corporate and
                  imperialistic  policies with perhaps even more fervor.
                  And then there's the race factor, which should not be
                  minimized.

                  >>> 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.

                  >>> 

                  >>> 

                  >> In ignorance, there is always room for hope.

_________________________________________

                  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/20120903/368179fb/attachment.html>