Even your argument for tax roll back is weak – Obama doesn’t plan to implement this until 2011 when the Bush tax cuts expire. Plenty of time for that to become an empty (and forgotten) campaign “promise”.

Election are for voting for politician’s promises. You cannot predict the future Max therefore you have NO evidence that Obama will not implement his proposed tax cuts for the middle tier payers. McCain clearly offers no rollback whatsoever from the regressive trajectory. Therefore between McCain and Obama, Obama offers a more progressive promise.

Deadbeat, if African Americans “reject” Thomas, it is his politics they reject, not his heritage which cannot be denied.

Max, what it means to be “black” has to do with politics NOT the lineage. It is not all about skin color Max but then you are “brother” so I assumed you knew that (sarcasm).

The reason why Obama is getting support from the African American community is that he is better on the issues than McCain and Obama this year has offered up programs that are even more progressive than both Dean and Kerry in 2004.

Unlike you Max, African American do engage in “lesser evil” voting because they HAVE TO BE pragmatic. Because McCain is running a blatantly racist campaign African American voters will come out in droves to vote for Obama. African American will use their vote to REJECT this kind of politics and therefore to African Americans, Obama is worthy of their vote.

You may not like that Max but that is the REALITY. Unfortunately there are many voices on the Left this year who reject that reality. Once again that reinforces why the Left has little to NO solidarity with the African American community. Which when you understand that the Left’s so-called “strategy” is to weaken the Democrats, having NO solidarity with the Democratic Party’s most loyal voting bloc is pretty fucked up.

Even your argument for tax roll back is weak – Obama doesn’t plan to implement this until 2011 when the Bush tax cuts expire. Plenty of time for that to become an empty (and forgotten) campaign “promise”.

Deadbeat, if African Americans “reject” Thomas, it is his politics they reject, not his heritage which cannot be denied.

Obama’s father came here on his own free will several decades ago. Surely you can’t deny those facts.

Until recently, Obama’s blackness – ability to represent African Americans – in Chicago was in constant question. He won elections because of white Jewish voters. He was rather disdained by most blacks, as I understand it, as being too white.

Yes, today, compared to the Republican white male (McCain) African Americans relate more to Obama; but it seems that was true of the so-called first “black” President Bill Clinton.

None of this crap, DB, is worthy of casting a vote for a person.

You response Max, demonstrates your ignorance and lack of cogency and nuance. Real has NOTHING to do with lineage. It is all about acceptance by the African American community. It also show how little solidarity you have with this community otherwise you would not have responded in that manner. Clarence Thomas is perhaps the MOST REJECTED African American politician ever by African Americans.

http://www.opednews.com/maxwrite/manage.php

Anyhoo, I hope to read your comments there but can’t promise I’ll try to engage them any more than I do here at DV. Words….words alone are certain good. To quote the Master. So…

keep ‘em coming!!

-Lloyd

But if all one is doing is calculating the lesser of evils (a most cyncial twist of democracy) because they think Obama will be better for the country, but are in fact “committed” to Nader’s positions, I say, why not vote for McCain, who would NOT pretend to be a “progressive” while serving the needs/wants of the corporate elite as will Obama.

Your point is to infer that it is always wrong to engage in “lesser evil” voting. I dispute that inference. In this election year I fault no one who supports Nader’s position yet decides to vote for Obama instead. The problem is that you possess such disdain for Obama that you are advising “lesser evil voters” to vote for McCain instead because “McCain, who would NOT pretend to be a ‘progressive’”. What I’ve said is that your argument is reckless.

Since you are making an argument FOR voting FOR McCain I chose to point out where Obama is more “progressive” than McCain. I needn’t repeat that here.

Last, you dwell on Zionism, Obama is a born-again Zionist if you believe what he says about Israel vis a vis Palestinians.

Unlike you Max I don’t dismiss, obscure or deny that Zionism as a major problem across the political spectrum of the United States. It was a major factor for the diffusion of the anti-war movement and the reason that there was a void this year filled by the Obama candidacy.

You argue on the one hand that Zionism is not a factor of U.S. body politics yet complain about Obama’s Zionism. That demonstrates a lack of consistency and duplicity. Your position on Zionism makes your disdain of Obama appear more hyperbolic than cogent and lack credibility.

Are you saying that Obama is progressive because he wants to roll back taxes to early 1990s? That’s at best faint “praise”. This is only “progressive” through the eyes of a Republican pol. Obama has made every effort to brand himself as a centrist. Only Dem/delusional progressives bend this to anything resembling “progressive”.

But on the issue of taxes, I would argue that income tax is NOT a progressive tax. Why? Because income is elastic and wealthy people rarely pay it – regardless of the political machinations. That’s the secret that the Repub/Dems/Corporate elitest keep for the “average joe”.

When you tax income you always hurt middle income people who do not have the means to “hide” that income by using the law and accountants. (Remember who creates the laws, DB?) So, a tax on hard earned income is a penality that pays mostly for war directly and indirectly. (Unless you think we have a trully universal/single payer health care system, and top notch infrastructure, and a life style to match or GNP?)

So, this little tax talk is a game that the Dems and Repubs parade out during election season.

As far as voting for lesser evils “making sense” well one person’s sense is another person’s folly. You have millions of Americans who will go to the polls and vote for one of these two clowns without knowing where they stand on key issues. Most will vote against the other rather than for anyone. I don’t call that “strategic”. I call it dumb. But hey, when was the last time civics was taught in our schools, or people actually read newspapers, or heaven forbid – BOOKS? The only genius in this system is that it expects an illiterate group of people to do most of the voting. The others will stay home or vote for someone else.

I don’t see all that much difference between Barack Obama and Clerance Thomas. I see even less difference between Obama and Colin Powell. So, real African American is kind of weird. I suspect Thomas’s lineage goes straight back to American Slavery. Obama’s doesn’t.

Last, you dwell on Zionism, Obama is a born-again Zionist if you believe what he says about Israel vis a vis Palestinians.

But if all one is doing is calculating the lesser of evils (a most cyncial twist of democracy) because they think Obama will be better for the country, but are in fact “committed” to Nader’s positions, I say, why not vote for McCain, who would NOT pretend to be a “progressive” while serving the needs/wants of the corporate elite as will Obama.

There are aspects of the Obama domestic position this is progressive. His tax cut for the middle tier is progressive as well as eliminating retirees making $50K or less from the tax rolls.

To say that lesser evil is a “cynical twist of democracy” imply that the U.S. election is “democratic” which they are not.

Also every election requires a thoughtful strategy. In 2004 it was much more important NOT to vote lesser evil than it is in 2008. That’s because in 2004 the Left has a change to build upon the Nader’s ~2.5% showing in 2000. Had the Left not dispersed the anti-war movement and the Greens and Nader made a serious run in 2004 there was no doubt that Nader could have achieved the 5% threshold that would have gotten him into the 2008 debate and made him a serious alternative for this election cycle. Unfortunately that didn’t happen and the Obama campaigned filled the void that the Left help to create.

Therefore voting for Obama as the “lesser evil” make sense since the Left offers in 2008 NO VIABLE ALTERNATIVE. Cynically suggesting a
vote for McCain is irresponsible on its face. Look at how McCain has been running his campaign with all its racist overtures. It is one thing to dislike Obama for his policies but to harbor such dislike that it cloud one’s judgment to eliminate all nuances IMO reflects poorly on the person making the criticism.

In fact voting “lesser evil” is acknowledging that one is not voting for Obama based on a progressive agenda but voting in order to prevent a reactionary like McCain from taking the White House. I would consider that being extremely pragmatic especially since the Left offers no viable alternative.

I noticed that both Chomsky and Zinn has now come out for Nader however where were these hypocrites in 2004. Both advocated voting for John Kerry. Both offered no criticism of the Left diffusing the anti-war movement and both never suggest that the Greens and Nader build a united front. These two offer both inconsistencies and confusion.

Also the Obama election does offer a chance to challenge the history of U.S. racial discrimination. Putting a real African American (that is someone who is considered “black” by the African American community not someone who happens to be “black” like Clarence Thomas) in the White House is historic and is a PROGRESSIVE event especially when considering the void that the Obama campaigned filled this election year.

The Left IMO should accept an Obama victory in 2008 so that they can REFLECT upon their errors from 2004. The error most especially that needs reflection is how they allowed Zionism to tear apart the best opportunity it had in years to really build a grassroots movement.

I am neither expecting a McCain win; nor am I recommending him. I’m recommending folks who believe in the Obama positions (first they need to know them!) vote for him; while those who argree with Nader’s vote for him.

But if all one is doing is calculating the lesser of evils (a most cyncial twist of democracy) because they think Obama will be better for the country, but are in fact “committed” to Nader’s positions, I say, why not vote for McCain, who would NOT pretend to be a “progressive” while serving the needs/wants of the corporate elite as will Obama.

If after reading this you still think I’m predicting a McCain win….well than you’re on your own, sir.

But if all one is doing is calculating the lesser of evils (a most cyncial twist of democracy) because they think Obama will be better for the country, but are in fact “committed” to Nader’s positions, I say, why not vote for McCain, who would pretend to be a “progressive” while serving the needs/wants of the corporate elite as will Obama.

If after reading this you still think I’m predicting a McCain win….well than you’re on your own, sir.

And for what it’s worth, Max old buddy, Karnak predicts a McCain win tomorrow. If Obama wins, I’ll throw up my hat in the air. But if McCain wins and you’re right and things don’t get worse, I’ll eat it.

But if I know the name of a European interneter you may have communicated with, I did not know they were European and/or I did not know you have communicated with them.

Finally, and although you didn’t inquire into this aspect of the situation, I’m under the distinct impression that Europeans generally (not to mention the rest of the world ouside of America) are of the opinion that a McCain presidency would be light-years worse than an Obama presidency.

Hence my query to you, and its unbelieving mien.

Why not just vote your progressive conscience – I’m making a rash assumption here that you are a progressive who thinks the following are reprehensivel positions: keeping US troops in Iraq (as well as mercenaries) for indefinite time, escalating a war in Afghanistan, endorsing capital punishment (even when no murder occurred), supporting the notion of nukes, natural gas, “clean” coal, off-shore oil drilling as integral parts of a “new” energy plan, threatening Iran with war, providing the ultimate support for Israel over the Palestinians, voting for circumventing FISA as well as the Patriot act over civil rights, voting for the bail out of nearly a trillion dollars for Corporate financial markets, supporting NAFTA/Free markets, threatening to invade Pakistan to kill Bin Laden, demonizing Hugo Chavez, promoting the continuation of the embargo on Cuba, his pledge against gay marriage, retaining a privatized-insurance-employer-based health care system and the list of anti-progressive stands goes on and on.

All of the above are Obama positions on some of the most critical issues facing America.

Now if you agree with Obama’s positions which are clearly aligned to his “opponents” with the exception of some small “degree” than by all means vote for him. You don’t need to shout it out on DV. There are millions of people who will fearfully go to the polls and do the same.

But if you really want change, you can send a big message by voting for Nader or McKinney or the Socialist candidate.

Obama will double down the Clinton pacification of progressives. There was nearly dead silence during Clinton’s rampaging of Somalia, Iraq, Haiti, and Bosnia. Much the same with NAFTA and well-fare reform and of course his infamous signing of the Gramm et al deregulation of the financial system.

With Obama you’ll have the added disadvantage of a near zealot number of believers in Obama no matter what he does, plus he’ll keep race as the centerpiece. He’ll be a loser for poor people of all color and yet keep the issue at bay with progressives because he is a person of color.

No, McCain will make change happen. Obama will keep the system lock step in place. Obama will be the great protector of corporate capitalism; and he silence much of the politic left as he does it.

Time will tell; but if we’re playing political calculation games than that’s the way I see it from here.

Otherwise, vote your conscience – it just takse a little courage.