We can still push from "outside the system" to try for changes, while still voting for the lesser of two evils. Voting for a lesser evil to prevent a greater evil from gaining power does not necessarily preclude you from attempting to change how the system works.-- Silash

I call bullshit. Can and will are two different things. There will be no big push from "outside the system" if Obama is elected. You have to be kidding with that. You have got to know, as the intelligent person that you are, that that will never happen. You do realize that correct? LWM, big tuna... hell(!) damn near everyone (including you it seems) who posts in these worthless fucking chatter sessions will find themselves contented. All of Daily Kos. All of Firedoglake... jeebus silash... sell it to someone else.

So I'd ask, are we talking about not voting as an individual moral choice, or as a broad strategy?

Well, the back and forth today was about personal moral choice I believe but I could see it used as a broad strategy. However, just as with letter writing, phone calling, internets thread commenting, etc., refusing to vote, even done on a large scale, wouldn't amount to much without some concurrent (and very serious) direct action. By itself, it would say something about where we the people stand but I don't honestly think would It scare them. They aren't listening/representing now... why would they care if no one voted?

But why can't we hope or work for these things or for some other truly revolutionary positive change AND vote for Obama or an acceptable write-in candidate, if he/she is the least of all available evils in the voting booth? -- Baldie McEagle

IIRC, no one has been talking about write-in candidates. Least ways not in the discussion today. Write-ins are fine with me (at one time I was going to write in Kucinich, with an XL neon Sharpie if faced with a Diebold screen) but that is a considerably less system/establishment perpetuating choice than voting for Obama. You really shouldn't conflate the two as if they are somehow equal.

Obviously you can do whatever you like Baldie. But I think you are kidding yourself. A vote for Obama is a vote for perpetuating the system and the establishment. Period. There hasn't been any significant action taken yet. Why would there be any action taken if Obama is elected? Do whatever you like Baldie. It is a "free" country after all.

I didn't. I had no idea third-party candidates had been ruled out of bounds. Certain commenters spoke as though the "other" option was not voting at all, so I assumed ALL candidates were considered unacceptable. --Baldie McEagle

lol...Uh...erm... what?? I think there is some serious miscommunication going on here...

Who said anything about voting for Obama? -- Baldie McEagle

? You did Baldie. I mean we have all been discussing establishment candidates (Obama, McCain, Clinton) wrt voting or not, but you said something about Obama in the quote below. What am I missing here? Remember this comment(?):

"But why can't we hope or work for these things or for some other truly revolutionary positive change AND vote for Obama or an acceptable write-in candidate..." -- Baldie McEagle

Wednesday, May 7, 2008 01:36 PM

And... how is the above statement not conflating voting for Obama with a write-in candidate? Seriously. I don't get it. I mean "AND vote for obama or an acceptable write in candidate." How is that not equating those two choices? I am not angry or upset here... I am just thoroughly confused.

BTW... ever seen this Carlin skit?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0u6lCBnRoHQ

I don't agree with him fully (especially wrt "fuck hope"), but he does express some valid points IMO.

If we allow iran to develop nuclear weapons, are we then responsible for any ensuing use of those weapons?-- NotOrbitBoy

Was the rest of the world responsible when we (the only country on the face of the earth ever to use a nuclear weapon) used them against Japan?

NOB, why aren't you over in Iraq fighting the "good fight"? Seriously, why don't you head on over there so you can be one of the first they send into Iran. Too old? A bed-wetting little bitch? What is your excuse? Why aren't you over there?

Assuming Iran develops a nuke, can we trust them to control what they have?. . .can we trust them to prevent others from using it?

It's not a pretty picture.

I don't trust Iran. -- NotOrbitBoy

So, again, why aren't you over there fighting for all you are worth? I mean, if this is the most dire threat to civilization as we know it, how can you sit on your ass? What is your excuse for not being there to fight "islamofascism?" We need to protect our "national interests" and poor Israel from certain destruction, correct? Answer the question... if it is all so dire, what is your excuse? Too old? Trick knee? Or are you just another right wing, pants-pissing coward who is completely willing to send others of to fight his battles for him?

Answer. the. god. damned. question.