Dragon of Avarice

Nevermind...I just read your profile and I'm convinced you are a troll of the highest magnitude.

Certainly, your one-party idealism, Cheney-worship and "saving the middle east by forcing American companies to outsource their jobs to Iraq" shenanigans are merely a highly evolved satire.

Right?

RIGHT?

"Hobson also said that write-in candidates spoil ballots after the primary."

It totally ruins the feng shui.

I wouldn't vote for a Democrat or a Republican. Sure Bush is bad, but Kerry or Gore would have handled his situation only marginally better.

Harry Browne or Nader for me, please.

ummm ... you'd think Oklahoma wouldnt suck that bad ... I mean ...imagine how much you would have suck to keep Texas from falling into the sea AND not allow real compition and choice in the vote for who is going to run the country .
If you cant write in all you have is the STATE's choice .



SO do you want the :
#1 cancer of the groin ( its funtion will be destroyed if you manage to cure it )
or
#2 rods of hot steel to be inserted in your anus ?

I mean you have a choice you whiney , liberal , terrorist loving , pig farker!! PICK ONE !

Nevermind...I just read your profile and I'm convinced you are a troll of the highest magnitude.

and cut that sucker...no one's gonna wanna read that crap all the way through...

Edsel
Still can't understand why voting for Nader equals voting for Bush? Think REAL HARD about it and perhaps it will make sense to you.

I'm sure you're equally upset that Republicans voted for Ross Perot in 92 and 96 because, you know, Clinton never did get 50% of the vote.

I voted for nader, twice- in 1996 and 2000, and campaigned
for him. This year, I supported Dean. He joined when Howard Dean got out.

Now, where does it say that I HAVE to vote for ubermillionaire Kerry? What if I want to vote for the candidate closest to my ideals?

Regarding FL- Gore lost it because 200,000 democrats voted for Bush. How clear is that. People who blame Nader for the FL loss are looking for a scapegoat. I hate bush as much as any other educated guy. But it's not Nader's fault we have him. By the time Gore got the nomination, I was ready to stay home on election day.

Perhaps if a quarter million registered democrats in the state of Florida hadn't seen fit to vote for Bush, Nader wouldn't (falsely) be blamed for ruining the election!

Having your party run a candidate with some credibility would certainly help.

2004-03-22 05:17:11 PM whidbey65
2004-03-22 05:13:17 PM StrikitRich
Maybe because much of the mainstream press is owned by big money that's staunchly Republicrat...

Hence my use of the phrase 'Corporate Press.'


Krootons - Gary Nolan is the current Libertarian candidate.

Nader is running to get issues aired. What issues? Who knows. He doesn't want dub reupped so he will pull out at the last moment.

I have this on good authority.

2004-03-22 05:21:03 PM
masmasmas

Two party (one, ideally) systems spur a vast amount of work and change.

Ummm, one ideally?

Like Iraq?

Like the Soviets?

Like China?

Please tell me I'm misunderstanding something here. Please.

//

Yes, you are. Those are other countries, and this is the United States. Things would inherently be different. Also, I am not calling for a dictatorship or communism. It is really a simple idea; it should not be so difficult to grasp.

-----

2004-03-22 05:21:57 PM
Pollexabator

So, unless my candidate is guaraunteed to win, I should vote for his opponent? What if I vote my conscience, rather than what my union leader tells me?

//

Union leader? Are you talking about unionized labour unions? If so, then, indeally, that would not be a problem, as unions would have been long-abolished. They are parasitic monsters, sucking the lifeblood of this country.

Unions create and maintain an atmosphere of ignorance and dependence. They make the worker dependent upon themselves in order to make sure that they will always have a place in the world. They keep the employees ignorant of how to handle their own affairs. They also gouge the employer, swindling money.

Unions are attempting to weaken the structure of the U.S. working world, and they usurp power at every turn. Eventually, when the structure is weak enough, they will make their last move, ensuring that they will forever be in power. We, the people, cannot let this happen.

-----

2004-03-22 05:23:31 PM
whidbey65

A one-party system is like some military dictatorship. And it oughta be...

//

You, too, are attempting to rob my statement of its intended spirit. One party does not automatically mean that it is a dictatorship, using strong-arm tactics to pressure voters.

-----

2004-03-22 05:25:23 PM
Rev. Skarekroe

I'm with you!
It worked for Nazi Germany, it worked for the Soviet Union, and by golly, it'll work for us!

//

It did work pretty well for those in charge in those cases, but that is beside the point.

1) As I said, I am not speaking of Nazis or Communists. I am talking about the democratic-republic of the United States. It is silly to think that it would be exactly the same as other countries.

2) It is foolish of you to think that because it might not have worked in the long-term in the past, it is impossible for a country to run with one party here in the present. That kind of thinking is terrible. We can learn from past mistakes and make things better.

Beeferoni. Explain that to me. If a bunch of people vote for a 3rd Party candidate (Perot, in your example), at what point does the EC actually register a vote for that 3rd party candidate? Does that or could that even happen?

Goddammit, Dragon! We're not gonna have ONE party!

We're AMERICANS! WITH IDEAS! THAT YOU had better start listenin' to...!

By the way, all primaries should be held on the same day. Then everyone has a choice.

I love the anti-Nader democratic line of thinking... "Nader cost us the election."

NO, NADER DIDN'T COST YOU ANYTHING. YOU COST YOURSELVES THE ELECTION BY NOT APPEALING TO MORE VOTERS - INCLUDING NADER SUPPORTERS.

I don't understand where Democrats get the idea that it's their God-given right to receive all votes not cast for Bush.

For the record, I think Bush is a terrible president on many fronts and I think Nader is a crackpot. But Gore and the Democrats have no one but themselves to blame for losing that election.

DOA- reel them in! You people are suckers for DOA's schtick. MASMASMAS keyed up the mike.

Calling all cars, calling all cars- TROLL ALERT.

:: holds up sign ::

"D.o.A. FOR PRESIDENT !!"

now will you go back to your GOP spamming Dragon ? See we love you and worship your masterfull wisdom . Now go away ...

2004-03-22 05:27:37 PM
dbaggins

troll

//

Unless you actually have something constructive to say regarding my post(s), it seems that you are the one acting like a troll.

-----

2004-03-22 05:32:29 PM
masmasmas

Nevermind...I just read your profile and I'm convinced you are a troll of the highest magnitude.

Certainly, your one-party idealism, Cheney-worship and "saving the middle east by forcing American companies to outsource their jobs to Iraq" shenanigans are merely a highly evolved satire.

Right?

RIGHT?

//

Wrong. I am serious in every venture that I undertake, online as well as off. Forgive me if I am wrong, but it seems as though the winds of change bother you. What I advocate in my profile is what must be done to bring this country onto the best possible path to the future. It will be up to me to convince the people to make these changes. It is a lot of pressure and responsibility, but I feel that I will be up to the task.

-----

2004-03-22 05:35:42 PM
ANNOYED

and cut that sucker...no one's gonna wanna read that crap all the way through...

//

If somebody lacks the basic attention span and maturity needed to read the important matters addressed in my profile, then they were not the ones to whom it was targeted.

Dragon of Avarice

Dude. Shhh, it's okay. I know. I hear the Ayn Rand rattling around in that 5-cent head of yours and I sympathize. I really do.

It's just so clear. So true and so right.

I know. I've been there.

If only people would just pay attention to us intellectuals, entrepreneurs and capitalists then we'd be even better than we already are.

Shhhh. It'll be okay. Eventually, when you read a little more Thomas Jefferson. A little more John Locke. A little more Adam Smith (read him carefully. And read ALL of it.) A little more Churchill and a little more of the US Constitution, then you might understand why things are so messy. And not quite as Minachean as they seem now.

Good luck.

Nader stole just as many votes from Bush as he stole from Gore.

PERIOD.

Also, Dragon of Avarice has delusions of grandeur. You get all kinds on these internet sites, including the schizophrenic ones.

2004-03-22 05:48:57 PM Dragon of Avarice

communication's a two-way street...you're riding a steamroller and I no likey...

A single party system is what they had in Iraq for so many years.

Worked well over there, especially if you were Baathist.

Joshg

I seriously dislike Nader, but this seems reasonable. He should have tried to team up with a Constitution party candidate or something to bring this suit.

Since the constitution party is trying hard to replace their candidate with Nader I doubt the guy is wanting to team up with him real bad right now. :)

2004-03-22 05:41:58 PM
whidbey65

Goddammit, Dragon! We're not gonna have ONE party!

We're AMERICANS! WITH IDEAS! THAT YOU had better start listenin' to...!

//

I am an American, too, and I know that people will not have a one party system. In fact, in my original post, I completely predicted that this is how such an idea would be received.

-----

2004-03-22 05:43:41 PM
BastsTomKitten

now will you go back to your GOP spamming Dragon ? See we love you and worship your masterfull wisdom . Now go away ...

//

Yes, I am sure that you would love it if I just went away, but since this is an open forum for the exchange of ideas, I do not think that I will do so just because somebody asks me to. Honestly, it would be good for you if you learned a bit of tolerance and acceptance for ideas that you do not agree with. You do not have to act passive-aggressively hostile.

What's the matter? Are my ideas a little too cutting edge and new for you? Can you not handle a bit of change? Well, that is too bad, as many people find the stagnation of our country to be a bad thing.

-----

2004-03-22 05:49:44 PM
masmasmas

There is no need to be insulting.

Why would the submitter give Nader a dumbass tag when he is one of the few politicians that is actually trying to return the United States to a democracy.

He threw the election? Oh, the thousands of black voters not allowed to vote because of the way Katherine Harris rigged the election had nothing to do with it I suppose?
If Nader swung the election, so did Buchanan, and the Right to Life party canidate. They each garnered enough votes to swing the election as well, but everyone loves to crap on Nader because the corporate controlled media doesn't want you to like Ralph Nader.

There is no need to be insulting.

STFU, you empty headed crybaby.

You talk about people who work for a living and wish to leverage their collective power to achieve appropriate respect, dignity and compensation for their minds, their effort and labor (their TIME for God's sake) and you refer to these people as bloodsuckers.

Who's insulting?

I really do hope you're a troll.

but everyone loves to crap on Nader because the corporate controlled media doesn't want you to like Ralph Nader.

Excellent...:)

Dragon of Avarice

I completely predicted that this is how such an idea would be received...Are my ideas a little too cutting edge and new for you? Can you not handle a bit of change?

Since when is fascism "cutting edge"?

Dragon of Avarice, I'm wondering something.

America is truly a diverse place, full of multitudes of different values, cultures, ideologies, and faiths.

Do you honestly feel as though a single party system can truly represent all of those often conflicting ideologies and values effectively?

I'm sure it looks good on paper, but when it comes down to it, it just isn't really that feasible.

I personally find even a two party system restrictive and unrepresentative of my values. I certainly haven't seen a platform that I am completely comfortable with!

GO RALPH GO!
Nader is willing to stand up for his ideals! Hell, Kerry won't even admit he's a liberal, the dumbass.



I am against gay marriage.




I am against gay marriage.




I am in favor of gay marriage.


This election, the Repocrats and Demublicans are just the same.

Vote Early.
Vote Often.
VOTE NADER 2004.

I have seen a lot of good ideas for a new voting system, the graduated system where voters rank candidates is a good idea, but I think we need to address the real Crux of the issue:

Instead of voting for who we think should be the president, we should all get to vote for who we do not want to win Who ever gets the fewest votes would win and I think everyone would be a lot happier.

2004-03-22 06:04:05 PM McGovern 72

awesome...:)

:: waves His D.o.A. for president sign :::

No No I am in awe of your wisdom and "cutting edge"political views .... and I am happily sharing this space with you .. and would never force you to leave ... I was just asking I didnt want you to feel hurt and stupid and ignorant when people started to unfairly bash you for your beliefs ..

I mean white jesus on a cross D.o.A. I was trying to help ...
so will you go away .. I mean we all think its in your best interest and your best interest is what counts right ?

Nader's about as far from what I want in a leader as it gets, but while I may think he's a loon, I think he's a sincere loon. I can respect that. He should damn well run for president if he wants to, and he should get to debate with the big boys as well.



The premise of the Democratic "Anyone But Bush" campaign demonstrates a pathetic lack of vision. Develop a platform and run with it, and let others do the same.



It's positively galling to hear Democrats make comments like "The stakes are too high for Nader to run". It's insulting and suggests that they somehow have something to offer America, and they don't. It's a self-serving statement by a party desperate to get power back only to continue everyday, mediocre politics.



I don't feel any conflict of interest here because Repubs and Dems don't have a clue what I want. The 2000 Election was my first true heed to my Libertarian views and I won't be looking back. Sadly, the 3rd parties will be pushed out by the big two, but without any support they'd just fade away entirely.


My conscience will be clear when I vote.

2004-03-22 06:01:12 PM
masmasmas

You talk about people who work for a living and wish to leverage their collective power to achieve appropriate respect, dignity and compensation for their minds, their effort and labor (their TIME for God's sake) and you refer to these people as bloodsuckers.

//

I called the ones who run unions blood-sucking parasites (and they are). I didn't disparage the worker in any way. In fact, I said how they were being taken advantage of by unions.

By defending unions, and letting them get away with this shifty, borderline-criminal behaviour, you are insulting and abusing the workers of the country. You are making them subservient dogs while letting the fleas on their backs grow fat off of the toil and sweat of others.

You speak of leverage, respect, dignity, and compensation. Well, if unions were abolished, then the people would eventually learn how to negotiate and deal with their own affairs. They would be able to gain the skills necessary to get ahead in this world, but, instead, unions force the people to rely on their parasitic organizations.

One large, grand union run by the federal government alone would not be so bad. An organization that keeps things level and fair.

Nader is one lost individual....

Nader is even more of a megalomaniac than bush, especially if he thinks he didn't spoil the last pres election. He said those who voted for him were disenfranchised voters who may not have voted anyway. What about the possibility that some of them (Enough to help gore win like he realy did) were not disenfranchised voters but instead were misinformed voters because of incorrect exit polls by the "Liberal Media" (Sorry but I am tired of that BS cop out attitude by right wingers... you poor slobs look for anything to cry about about. Why all the press on Dem supporting Stewart who made $60,000 on a stock trade, and so little on Repub supporting Ken Lay who made a billion defrauding investors and employees. Must be that liberal media prosecuting teh GOP Good Ol Boys huh?)Fark off Nader the Corvair rules!

One large, grand union run by the federal government alone would not be so bad. An organization that keeps things level and fair.

This it through the farking looking glass. Let's see if I've got this right. A privately organized, duly elected leadership of workers' representatives is equivalent to some parasitic insect.

But, if the federal government (known for its virtue, its incorruptibility, its humanity, its efficiency and its responsiveness) were to organize labor then all would be right with the world.

Dude, you are wrongheaded to the point of absurdity.

Look. I don't think unions are perfect. But I also know that the market is perfect. That's the problem with you Atlas Shrugged view of the world. It's wrong at its essence in exactly the same spot that Marx was wrong.

Damn humanity keeps getting in the way.

Cheap labor objectives are certainly harder to accomplish with those pesky unions in the mix.

Damnit.

I meant the market is not perfect.

Kinda change the meaning, huh?

2004-03-22 06:03:24 PM
Microbe

America is truly a diverse place, full of multitudes of different values, cultures, ideologies, and faiths.

Do you honestly feel as though a single party system can truly represent all of those often conflicting ideologies and values effectively?

//

Yes, by doing what is good for everybody in the big-picture sense. We need people in power who are willing to look at things on a large, global scale, and, even though it might not be popular now, things will work out for the best in the future.

We need somebody who will abolish welfare, channeling that money directly to American big businesses, which will grow larger and accept more workers, effectively cutting out the middle man. We need somebody who will get rid of corrupt and shiftless labour unions, freeing up our nation from its oppressive, invisible shackles. We need somebody who isn't afraid to tell the truth: that outsourcing labour and jobs is not a bad thing. It can help people, both abroad and domestically.

---

I have to leave for now, but I will return, most likely, to reply to any posts that warrant it.

*wonders how MyrnaMinkoff would weigh in on this one*...:)

I don't really care if Nader makes it on the ballot or not. It's a fruitless effort...Bush will take this state by 10 percentage points. I love it here, but I hate it. (Mostly for the reasons Sleepy Weasel pointed out.)

But to all you farkers ragging on Oklahoma....lick me.

Underwhelmed - "Instead of voting for who we think should be the president, we should all get to vote for who we do not want to win Who ever gets the fewest votes would win and I think everyone would be a lot happier."

Or we could do it like the Greeks who ever gets the most votes gets banished from the country...

By the way I WAS a registered green until nader tried to become a part of the party. That sent me packing back to the Dems quicker than the supreme court gave the election to Bush.

I'd rather work on democracy, Dragon...your idea sounds like we should consolidate power in a very non-democratic manner...to what end? I see your idealism, and raise you a powermonger to upset it.

We're not going to rise above capitalism to a better system because the world's not ready for it. And I feel a lot more comfortable hearing diverse voices...you get sick of that party, where do you go? You're screwed.

I feel that more progress would be made if we had a buttload of political parties...if every candidate were taken seriously and given equal air time and the VOTERS decided who should represent...

2004-03-22 06:18:40 PM MyrnaMinkoff

Actually I was hoping you'd run away to Seattle...:)

We ain't got NONE of that 3.2 beer here...;)

and better weed too...

Dragon of Avarice

Besides, yammering on about the evil of labor unions is like biatching about all the harm buggy whips are doing to the youth of this country.

Labor unions, having outlived their usefulness and accomplished a great many of their objectives, are on the way out as a political force. Just ask Dick Gephardt. Talk about whipping a dead horse. Jesus.

Perhaps it's time you take a look at corruption and conspiracy at the corporate welfare level which is causing tremendous perversions in your precious market. Corporations are not all-knowing and all-beneficent, profit motive be damned. Anybody who's ever had a job working for a corporation knows this.

Talk to me once you've had a real job.

MrynaMinkoff

Insert gratuitous OK bashing here.

I'm ready for my punishment.

Nader is a "blumpkin"

<i>Cheap labor objectives are certainly harder to accomplish with those pesky unions in the mix.</i>

Nah, not if we just outsource all the labor to Iraq!