Well, I’m a socialist.

–”Where is it written that taking from the “rich” and giving to the “poor” is a function of a democracy?”–

In a lot of socialist books, articles, speeches…
In all seriousness though, it’s not a function of a capitalist state whether there are elections or not. Hence the opposition to capitalism that answers your first question.
There’s more to it than that of course. It’s about workers power, workers control. It’s about unleashing the capabilities of mankind and doing away with unnecessary, parasitic robber barons who contribute nothing and take everything.

–”Doesn’t everyone realize the poor pay NO taxes?”–

I pay taxes, I’m poor. It’s simple.
I suppose that depends on how you define poor. If poor means homeless, then you’re right, they don’t pay taxes. If poor means working class, under constant financial strain ect…then you’re dead wrong because we all pay taxes while the obscenely wealthy people we work for get tax cuts with no questions asked.

What is ironic is that the Left deliberately cut themselves off from this energy by diffusing the anti-war movement and sabotaging the Nader campaign four years ago. The Left left themselves with no institutional foundations or structures to position themselves to lead that energy forward and is being left behind this year.

Thus the height of irony is that the people are IN FRONT OF the Left and the embittered Left only offers harsh criticism of Obama who leaped in to fill the void opened by the Left. But worst of all is the criticism and castigation of his supporters who are making the “least worst” of a bad situation. There is virtually no analysis or discussion (except for Dr. Petras) by the Left about the Left and the outreach needed to attract the people choosing to support Obama.

What I detect however is an undercurrent of “hope” for an Obama fuck-up or loss rather than engagement of those supporters looking for substantive change. Chaos as a political strategy will be IMO to the detriment of the Left.

I agree with you 100%.

You did not answer my main objection to Ron Paul’s main idea of freedom of regulations and a call for dismanteling all government programs.
As I said, this is an ivitation for big corpoations to run amock without and restraint. Look at what is happening in our banking and
financial system right now as a result of dismantling of the New Deal
banking regulations!!
Also most of us might need unemployment compensations and the
majority of retirees are depending on Social Security and Medicare.
Widows and abondened women with children need help too.

“Ron Paul call for less government and more freedom from regulations is nothing but a clever mask for the corporations to run amock exploiting workers , consumers and ruining the environment.”

Clever mask? Well that’s not my read of Ron Paul and I don’t think he is being devious or dishonest. …nor do I think he’s big business/corporations lackey either…like Obama and McCain.

I’m baffled by the Left’s shunning him like a leper…Joshua Frank wrote a piece sometime ago urging the left to endorse Paul. Then Frank and notably Paul were mercilessly shot down in flames by the likes of Sherry Wolf in the article “Freedom to Starve”.
Had I read her article before I knew anything about Ron Paul’s core message I would most certainly run away from this guy like the plague.
Wolf is no doubt a very skilled writer who must have scored highly in debating societies in her school days. But reading her after knowing something about Ron Paul, frankly, I’m not much impressed by her verbose rant. She rants about Paul’s racism, anti-abortion and immigration policies which, I feel, are contrived exaggerations. Obviouly, he’s not perfect. Is she?
In sum, I’ll rather stick to FREEDOM for deep down I know that’s what will keep me away from STARVATION!

Hirschhorn mentioned in his article Jon Stewart et al feasting on election results. Has anyone else observed how Stewart and Colbert are not the “cynic/radical/oh so hip bullshit detectors” everyone thinks they are?

Yes, they expose the hypocrisy and idiocy of politicians and the media but there is a line they will not cross. The sarcastic microphones/pens go silent on criticism of Israel. Stewart had Jimmy Carter on to plug his latest noncontroversial book – not the previous tome about apartheid in the Holy Land. The Misenheimer book about the Israeli lobby never saw the light of day on Stewart’s or Colbert’s show.

Latin America? Stewart toes the U.S. line with regards to denigrating Chavez. Same with Putin and Russia.

Nader? Stewart spouts the usual liberal bile. McKinney? She may as well not exist? For a supposedly “hip” show, shouldn’t these “outsiders/rebels” get equal airtime?

Kucinich? He was butt of jokes 100% of time during primaries – made one appearance on Daily Show. No skewering though of powers that be who kept him out of several debates.

Obama? Stewart and Colbert are so far up the his butt they can’t see daylight. Their razzing of him is tepid and “careful.” The hypocrisies of Obama could fill a week’s worth of shows but he gets the kid glove treatment from fake news hosts just like he does with real news ones (allegedly real news, that is).

Guests pundits or authors are the usual suspects, 1) “safe” liberals who won’t go over the line in any criticism of Democratic aiding and abetting of Republican misdeeds; and 2) Republicans who are willing to criticize the war. Pundits and journalists from this website, Counterpunch, and Black Agenda Report are conspiciously absent from a show which aims to expose the bullshit going on.

I know Stewart and Colbert shows are comedy but their “fake news” is the only info a lot of people get daily, especially in the younger demographic. It would be nice if they got the cajones to step beyond the govt/company line more often. Doing so would also give them more material to work with. If their pet fave Obama wins in November, who will they mock nightly with the Dems in control of Congress and the White House, especially if Stewart and Colbert are too coward to stick it to the Dems like they do Bush and Co.?

Ron Paul call for less government and more freedom from regulations is nothing but a clever mask for the corporations to run amock exploiting workers , consumers and ruining the environment. When there are no regulations and gevernment agencies to enforce them , then the powerful and super rich will have their way against the regular hapless unorganised Joes/Janes. Guess who will win??!!

Why is the following piece of wretched racist effluent still on this board?

jay said on August 20th, 2008 at 8:41 am #

“The only thing I take exception to is the “stupid” label given to white racists. Most of the intellectual professional whites I know are racist.Whether they,like the black racists, admit it or not is a different story. Blacks are inferior and everyone knows it. People in general are all just afraid of the truth.”

Keep lowering the bar, DV–that’s a GOOD IDEA.

Sincerely,

Arch Stanton

The problem is, that it would be increasingly hard to state facts that would back this up. Obama has at this point basically said that he supports the same broad economic policy as McCain\Bush\Clinton\Bush\Reagan. The same ‘globalization’ and ‘free trade’ policies that have been going on for some time now are fully supported by Obama.

And he is also now in total alignment on foreign policy with McCain\Bush\Clinton\Bush\Reagan. Heck, the negotiations in Baghdad on a US-Iraq agreement might lead to a US withdrawal plan that’s faster than what Obama is proposing. During his trip to Israel, Obama promised that he’d ‘negotiate’ just like Bush (ie, issue an ultimatum, then start bombing) and essentially he told the Israelis that if Bush doesn’t attack Iran, they can count on Obama to continue the policy. Obama is fully supportive of the current policy of increasing attacks inside Pakistan, and he’s been right there with Bush and McCain during the ‘Ossetia’ crisis.

So, when you hear the Democrats just assert that Obama is better than McCain, notice carefully that they never give solid reasons for this statement. And think to yourself that the reason they don’t is that they can’t.

The age difference in voting patters is incredibly stark this time around and you can actually chart where the results will go compared to exit polling based on the percentage of African Americans in the population and the location of the state. The Democrats would easily win this election with a white candidate in the same way the Democrats are way ahead in Congressional elections. If anything McCain is a handicap on Republicans by destroying that special little conservative enthusiasm they used to have at the polls.

You should ask yourselves a few questions here.

First is Obama a fake? Yes

Does that matter for 90% of the population? No

Will Obama lose because of his race? Absolutely

Would Obama be as bad as McCain? No not unless Clinton was as bad as Bush. Let’s face it after 8 years of Bush with an economy on the brink of collapse McStupid might just tip us over the edge to where it doesn’t matter how much progressives organize or Americans figure it out. You’re all just hoping for Obama to lose because of a personal vendetta on his betrayal by his rightist jump, but you can’t let that anger allow you to screw over the country you claim to care about.