Da-yam!

I just saw Ralph Nader on C-Span!

I WOULD LOVE TO HAVE THIS MAN FOR PRESIDENT!

But it seems as tho we're limited to electing either a Republican or Democrat (which might be one and the same [even tho I've considered myself a "Democrat."]) *sigh* ....and I use that word elect, "lightly." Who knows if we'll ever "elect" anybody again???...*sigh*

What a waste that his intelligent, insightful, man "would appear" to be available to us,and yet we CAN'T have him...

He is SOOOOO right on!

Love,
Rainbow

I remember him from over 15 years ago when he used to be on the "Donahue" show and he was usually making some corporation do the right thing for people...not profits....and I seem to recall that Linda liked him too!
But...it SEEMS like a vote for Nader is a vote for Bush....but MAYBE things aren't as they "seem"??

Go Green.

Once upon time over on the hill, there were two big fat ants, which ate 40% of all the ant food. Moreover, because they were sooooooo fat, they had to payoff big fat anteater living in the tall trees of the big forests.

So all the little worker ants were very tired and hungry. This made them very grumpy and they were always arguing about how to get more food. One group was very conservative and thoht if they did not let the big fat ants have food they would get any either. Another group thoht that there was plenty of food but the big fat ants were hording it.

One day a little old worker ant stop doing what the big ant say and start feeding our selves.
We could organize many little ants to take care of the food. "Don't you all think that is the right thing to do?" asked the little old ant.

The little ants argued again about no food or hoarded food.

"We have to stick together in our groups!" shouted several from each. "Or the other size will win all the food."

The little old ant spoke again, "If we continue to aurge many will be hungry and some will waste our food. If you do what your heart says is right, and being fed and treated fair by all the ants is right, then it will not matter want the big fat ants say or do. The solution is easy. It is our arguing about the big fat ants, which allow them to win. All we need to do is stop giving food to the same big fat ants and elect little ant like our selves that have care about ants more than anti-ant-eater defense and being safe from tall trees falling on their heads."

The ants thoht about it and immediately started arguing again.

The little old ant scratched his head and thoht, "I guess they aren't that hungry, yet?"

*sigh*

Right on, Proxy!

Yep, Peggy, Linda said she'd vote for Ralph Nader even if he ran for dogcatcher!

Rainbow, I know this goes against the "conventional wisdom" in this age of convoluted political manipulations and power-block alignments, but my sentiment is this:

If you would rather have Ralph Nader than Kerry for President, then VOTE for Ralph Nader rather than Kerry!

That's the whole point of the democratic process! If us "little folks" let ourselve be manipulated into voting on "the lesser of two evils" rather than voting on principle, then whose fault is it that the manipulators get away with winning elections without giving us real choices? Maybe our principled votes won't have their way, but they WILL let others know that there are folks out here who aren't buying into the "practical expediency over principle" trap that the pols are counting on cornering us into ... and the next time even MORE folks will vote their true beliefs instead of the ones they feel cornered into.

And even if our votes are complete throwaways in terms of election results, they will still have one important result: we will have our own consciences clear of giving the "possibly least damaging" candidate the numbers that erroneously show a "popular mandate."

If we want to influence the political process to give us REAL choices, then we're going to have to stop rewarding their failure to do so by voting for one of their FAKE choices!

IMHO.

Love,
Greg

Oh Gregory......*sigh*

That is SUCH A HARD ONE!

I truly do wish we could get Ralph Nader in office...really, and truly! ...and if I thought my vote could do it...I would (I may still...who knows?)

One thing I do know....I'm not sure if I could stomach another four years with "Dubya" and his henchmen...*sigh*

Even tho as I've stated before, Kerry would not be my first choice for the guy to run against Bush.....if he's all we've got to work with, then he's definitely superior to the bubble headed booby who now holds office...*sigh*

To vote for Nader....would take away a Kerry vote, thereby giving Bush one more.....seems like s "lose, lose, situation" to me..

(except for my conscience...*sigh*)

Love,
Ginny

I hear ya, Rainbow and I didn't mean to lay a guilt trip on you for not voting your real preference ... of course you have to cast your vote however you believe it will do the most good.

I suppose it boils down to how much better than Bush you think Kerry is likely to be. As a fellow alumnus of Skull & Bones with deep-pocket corporate connections and membership in all the same NWO-circle organizations, my own guess is ... not much. And he hasn't shown much character or principle in the campaign so far, that I can see, just pandering to the buzz issues that look like they're where the votes are and playing the familiar political shuffle of making statements that sound meaningful but when you analyze them closely don't really promise anything.

I can't stomach the thought of Bush for 4 more years either, and to be frank, I'm not sure our republic can survive it. But in the state we're in, I'm not sure it can survive the next few years with ANY leader who isn't strongly opposed IN PRINCIPLE to the power-grab that's now dominating the Federal scene, and I really don't see ANY politicians with the spine or will to stop that Machiavellian machine, except a couple like Paul or Kucinich and a few outsiders like Nader. Certainly not Kerry. That's how I'm seeing it, anyway.

Love,
Greg

Yeah Greg....*sigh* This is the kind of stuff that make you feel helpless...

Love,
Rainbow

Hello fellow voters ,

Rainbow and Greg, I hear what you are saying about the upcoming election. That it doesn't matter which one of them gets it, we'll get the SAME. I am puzzled as to why you think John Kerry and George Bush are the same.

IMHO, the PROBLEM is that politicians, one and all, ultimately DO cater to the wishes of their voting (or somewhat voting) constituencies, unless of course they are in their last term and don't care about being reelected. Which is the number one reason why having W back for four more is a not very pleasant thought. Even in that case though, the public does not have to tolerate any politician doing whatever they want in the face of the wishes of the people... I really think that in most cases, as long as they are being watched and held accountable through active public discourse, that average citizens have recourse if they don't like what they are getting.

If there is blaming to go around as to who is responsible for the state of affairs, go no further than John Q. Public. The mentality that the average citizen is powerless is what is driving the political machine and the status quo. The message for people who believe their vote doesn't count is, instead, that's because you THINK it doesn't count.

If there is to be reform, it can't come from one idealist outsider riding into Washington DC town. It has to start with a new awareness by citizens that they have a responsibility to hold their government accountable by the power of their vote. Our responsibility doesn't stop after we cast a ballot on election day. The problem is, people just want to be led and taken care of. So, they are being led, and they are being taken care of all right!

One thing that is not the fault of politicians is that to remain popular and electable they must pander to all the fear based desires of the public. Leading example: Pols are hearing loudly and clearly that people are demanding affordable health care to be provided by the bureaucratic government AND they want affordable drug prescriptions...People are so blind to the fact that they have brainwashed themselves that they NEED drugs to be healthy and live longer (have you walked around in an OLD cemetery lately and seen how long people lived before we had this, unless they died at sea or at birth?!). By abdicating responsibility for one's health to the government, the result is inefficient unaffordable systemized failure.

Another leading example: The War on Terror. This will probably be about as effective as the War on Drugs or the War on Poverty. The public is demanding that the government keep beefing up the beefy military because this somehow gives them a false sense of security. People have to recognize that they create what they fear. This is the Conscious Evolution that is needed. Thoughts create reality. Period. And this works a certain way.

Back to Kerry. Yes, he has played the game to get where he is. If he didn't, he wouldn't be there at all. I would like to think that he wants to make a difference. I believe that he has a very different dream and vision for American in the future than does the Bush administration. I firmly believe that Kerry is sincerely anti-war in principle and that you win "wars" with hearts rather than guns. He does believe in a STRONG military, yes, just not an overblown one.

His vote to give the Pres the power was troubling to me also...I had been writing to all my pols before that, and he sent a 12-page email explaining that his vote was not a carte blanche vote to go there... The administration was promising that they would proceed first with UN etc. and exhaust all possibilities before going to war. He said, believe me, GWB will be held accountable for any actions he takes... I agree with you that his vote was troubling when he was saying he did NOT want the US to strike...even if it was to protect our kids being forced to go over there by giving the image that the country was united in backing their efforts.

I feel that the real reason he voted this way is because he wanted to run for the Presidency, and he didn't want to be eliminated up front because of the misguided public's uninformed opinions.

Yes, he was a key player in the Iran Contra affair and was at first demanding accountability all the way up to George Sr and Reagan...then he backed off. He was a junior senator. I'll bet he was convinced to back off by people who agreed there was this corruption but felt it would be "bad" for the nation at that time to have a scandaled failed administration. Things were pretty rosy otherwise, so why rock the boat? ALSO, and this is important: I have a feeling he was counseled that his attempt to unmask the corruption would FAIL at that time... So, he probably figured, I'll just fail, then my career will be over, and then I won't be able to make a difference at all. You may disagree with me, but I just have this feeling that he decided to WAIT, and just play the game for a while, until it was his turn.

Remember at that time there was the Tower Commission, and they were about to blow the lying administration out of the water...then, within a couple of days, Sen. John Tower AND Sen. John Heinz, both key players on this investigative panel, died VERY mysteriously. And now Kerry is married to John Heinz widow. You know what? I think they have been waiting for the chance to actually make some changes.

I disagree that Kerry and Bush share a vision for a same type of 'new world order.' I think their visions are opposites. I think one wishes to lead by war and military muscle (which conveniently enriches their friends) and I think the other would prefer cooperative governments of allies in order to lead toward peace.

I agree that Nader and some others are very very good men, but I think the problem is that they would be rendered powerless if they tried to reform things... UNLESS the public were loud in support of their policies...

I have to pray that John Kerry sincerely wants to make a difference in the future of America and sees what this country COULD do with its resources, good stuff rather than more failed ugly stuff. I feel that his youthful idealism from his post Viet Nam days has not died.

But if you disagree, please explain why...my mind is wide open.

Love,

lol Go ask Silverbells on Randall's site.
I bet she could tell you.

BTW: She's still waiting for her answers.
And so am I.

Quote:

---

"....the public does not have to tolerate any politician doing whatever they want in the face of the wishes of the people... "

---

Oh Piscesdreamer! Have you forgotten how GW started the war in Iraq....totally against the wishes of many, many, U.S. citizens, not to mention the wishes of other countries, and the UN??? He did exactly what he wanted to do, and those of us who protested had NO recourse, whatsoever! *sigh*

Quote:

---

"The message for people who believe their vote doesn't count is, instead, that's because you THINK it doesn't count."

---

*sigh* Ohmigosh, PD! There were many votes in Florida that didn't count when GW "won" the election... (also, it's my understanding that the electoral college is set up, so that third parties are not easily gotten on the ballot)

Quote:

---

"It has to start with a new awareness by citizens that they have a responsibility to hold their government accountable by the power of their vote."

---

Believe me....there is nothing better that I'd like than to think my vote "had power." Votes didn't have power in the LAST presidential election....and with what I'm hearing about the new voting machines, it looks like an "honest" election may not be possible...

Quote:

---

Another leading example: The War on Terror. This will probably be about as effective as the War on Drugs or the War on Poverty. The public is demanding that the government keep beefing up the beefy military because this somehow gives them a false sense of security. People have to recognize that they create what they fear. This is the Conscious Evolution that is needed. Thoughts create reality. Period. And this works a certain way."

---

I for one, do NOT get a false sense of security by having a beefed up military. In fact, I cringe at the thought of all the lives of those in the military, that have been sacrificed, as well as the lives of innocent civilians because of GEORGE BUSH'S WAR!!! In fact, I don't even believe there is a "war on terror." It was an excuse to invade Iraq, which was planned long before 9/11.

....and I agree that thoughts DO create reality...but John Q.Public is "fed" such a bunch of bull en masse, that it's frightening to think of what "reality" those thoughts en masse, just might be creating..*sigh*

Quote:

---

"..I would like to think that he (Kerry) wants to make a difference. I believe that he has a very different dream and vision for American in the future than does the Bush administration. I firmly believe that Kerry is sincerely anti-war in principle and that you win "wars" with hearts rather than guns.

---

PD, I truly hope you're right! It would be a nice refreshing point of view. *sigh*

Quote:

---

"And now Kerry is married to John Heinz widow. You know what? I think they have been waiting for the chance to actually make some changes."

---

Once again PD, I truly hope you are right...I understand his wife is quite a remarkable woman...

Quote:

---

I have to pray that John Kerry sincerely wants to make a difference in the future of America and sees what this country COULD do with its resources, good stuff rather than more failed ugly stuff. I feel that his youthful idealism from his post Viet Nam days has not died."

---

I plan to vote for John Kerry (even if he was in Skull and Bones, and even tho I'm not sure my vote will even be counted), and with you I will pray that John Kerry sincerly wants to make a difference in the future of America...Let's hope the voting machines will meet the standards that they should, by the time the election comes a round....EXPECT A MIRACLE!