Comments on: Remember the Fourth of November

By: Hue Longer

Hue Longer — Mon, 27 Oct 2008 09:32:13 +0000

Hello jjcrocket,

If you read this article, please keep reading more on DV

By: jjcrocket

jjcrocket — Sat, 25 Oct 2008 23:22:14 +0000

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_Gh4tspUL7I&eurl=http://nicedeb.wordpress.com/2008/10/24/wild-red-star-william-ayers-calls-pigs-to-protect-him-from-fox-news/

Watch the real threat to democracy on You Tube.

Bill Ayers out shopping in Chicago with his RED STAR sweater proudly displayed on his chest. This is not your average protester, but The Pentagon Bomber showing his colors!!!!!!! Today Barack Obama not 36 years ago!

The guy who kicked off Barack Obama’s campaigns in his living room! The guy who had Obama Direct millions of dollars to ACORN, Which good soldier Obama did!!!

By: bozhidar bob balkas

bozhidar bob balkas — Sat, 25 Oct 2008 21:50:49 +0000

deadbeat,
we have yet another problem to solve. i evaluate ur statement that the Left (whatever that may be?) had diffused (whatever that may mean) the energy of ’00-04 as a conclussion.
and especially in view that no protest had ever deterred, prevented, let alone stopped a war once it was under way.
(double the chances for winning wars in afgh’n, iraq (for some)
yes, that applies also to invasion of vietnam. US may have withdrawn from vietnam because of other reasons and only marginally because of protest.
the protest in ’03 was, i conclude, too small to deter uncle. perhaps, 30+mns protestors may have prevented the invasion of iraq.
but we can’t rerun the history to find out.
similarly, protestors wld have to number at least 50mn to stop the occuapations.
again, we do not know. and in a view that 90% of amers will vote for continuance of warfare/occupations, that leaves only ab 10% of people who might protest.
but even that much is unlikely. how ab just 1-4%?thnx

By: Max Shields

Max Shields — Sat, 25 Oct 2008 21:28:31 +0000

Deadbeat,

What the hell are you talking about?

By: Deadbeat

Deadbeat — Sat, 25 Oct 2008 19:30:58 +0000

Max Shields accuses “progressives” of taking those energies for change and misplacing them on a person (Obama) they deny us the opportunity to use that energy to build a real movement

Unfortunately that doesn’t jive with the facts. The fact is that the anti-war movement was very real in 2003-2004 and unfortunately the Left diffused that energy out of the movement especially when members of the movement spoke out about the inordinate influence Zionism was having on U.S. Foreign Policy. Those that either feared an anti-Semitic backlash or who wanted to obscure and camouflage Zionism’s influence within the U.S. saw it in their interest to weaken and diffuse the antiwar movement.

This action let a huge political vacuum that could have been filled by a movement that is now being filled by a phenomenon. Blaming “progressives”, “liberal”, “Democrats” is a diversion from taking a lens at the “Left” own role for its own failures.

The Left asserts that its strategy is to build a movement and to weaken the Democrats yet the Left consistently fails to build these so-called movements because it fails to build solidarity especially with the most loyal group of Democratic Party voters — African Americans.

History shows that African Americans has supported third parties in large numbers. This was evident by the support African American gave the Communist Party in the 1930′s. So it has been done and it has been done.

Unfortunately people have put their hope into Obama because there is no viable alternative coming from the Left. The system has narrowed these alternatives and oppressed groups like African Americans are not going to “waste” their vote on the disorganization, duplicity and hypocrisy coming from the Left.

As you can see the right wing, the GOP, and members of mainstream media are now scapegoating African Americans and Latinos as the primary culprits of the mortgage meltdown. Unless their is a viable alternative to the Democrats it is guaranteed that blacks will be voting for the Democrats.

By: bozhidar bob balkas

bozhidar bob balkas — Sat, 25 Oct 2008 18:16:08 +0000

max. u’r right. not so much obama but those who, in my knowledge, r deluded almost to the point that one cld go mad. thnx for ur comment.

By: Max Shields

Max Shields — Sat, 25 Oct 2008 17:46:36 +0000

Bob, you are right that is not purely about a person, but about a comprehensive systematic set of policies and funding for 200 years.

But, we don’t vote for a system. We vote for a person. The underlying issue regarding Obama is not that he is “bad” or “worse” than his opponent; or that he is liberal or not. The underlying issue is how much do we believe these characters are anything more than products and perpetrators of the status quo – uncle as you call it.

The running argument is not against Obama, per se, but against those who act as if what Obama represents is change; and that that energy, particularly by progressives and so-called lefties denies the truth and the conditions that many of these progressives clearly understand when not confronted with the political machine that says you simply must vote for what we put before you. Afterall one of them will be president in January. Now, shut up and vote for a or b.

By taking those energies for change and misplacing them on a person (Obama) they deny us the opportunity to use that energy to build a real movement, rather than the phony trumped up freny around Obama’s campaign.

That is the issue, Bob. At least as I see it.

By: bozhidar bob balkas

bozhidar bob balkas — Sat, 25 Oct 2008 16:01:13 +0000

the more we blame an individual for events in raq since ’91, the less we’l understand. let’s get over individualizing complex events.
look at the uncle also.
US cld have mcarthurs, mcveighs in charge at that time. what fireworks we’d have then?
to obtain proper knoweldge we need thousands upon thousands of honest observers to educate us.
we do have some. but their pieces don’t appear in nyt.