You don't have to agree with GG, but you can't accuse him of dishonestly or hypocrisy or whatever. -- Paul Daniel Ash

Oh but I absolutely can. And will. It's either that or idiocy. I happen to think he isn't an idiot.

What do you think he is going to do come next election cycle PDA? He is going to recommend that everyone vote for the LOTE. Greenwald is too "serious" to ever support, hope of winning or no, a truly anti-establishment candidate. A candidate must have a chance of winning. Greenwald is too much of a "realist" and a "pragmatist."

Not that doing the correct thing and advocating for a truly anti-establishment candidate(s) would make much of real difference in and of itself but it would at least be a more intelligent course of action and be something positive. It is simply the least he - and all of the rest of "us" - should be doing.

What is most damaging about all of this is exactly what Goldsmith celebrated: that Obama's political skills, combined with his status as a Democrat, is strengthening Bush/Cheney terrorism policies and solidifying them further. -- GG

And yet no apology or even admission that he was wrong in pushing Obama will pass Greenwald's lips. No deviation from the LOTE, more-and-better-democrats plan for change is forthcoming.

What is most damaging about Greenwald is that his writing skills combined with his status as a respected "liberal" information gatekeeper helped and will continue to help get people like Obama elected.

Sorry for this obvious retort, but: Tell all of that to the founding father's slaves and the indigenous American Indians. -- normbreyfogle

I am becoming irritated. Are we still murdering Indians and enslaving Blacks? Are Women still unable to vote? Has our electoral system and the outcomes from it remained static since its inception? Things change and people change them. If you and PDA would kindly go back and read what I wrote and look at the word IDEA that I purposefully italicized, I think you might have a better understanding of what I am getting at. The founders and their system as it was originally put into practice were not entirely about equality no. That is a fact. But they did break away from an even less egalitarian system of government and laid the foundation for future equality. Their ideas and their system left open the opportunity for change. All it takes are the correct forms of pressure and changes will be made. One of them could be doing away with the electoral college if that is thought necessary. Another could be instant runoff voting. How about public financing? Changes can be made. The actual system can be made better.

*shrug*

They’re Just Pictures!

Come on people. Get out of your demented, sadistic, voyeuristic state for a moment and ask yourself what it is that you are craving to see: “Pictures” (eight-by-ten glossies of people being tortured).

There are no transcripts, no confessions, no criminal identifications, no evidence that is worthy to be seen by anyone except the members of a jury. We’ve already been told of what happened. As long as we can be assured that this information will be available to the courts, we do not need a full public disclosure.

You seem to be only interested in viewing the gore.

There are some really sick puppies hanging around this web site.

-- Harry Slushpump

This officially ranks 3rd on my unofficial list of the dumbest posts ever to be seen in the comments section of UT.

It's NOT the Muslim world they're afraid of inflaming

It's your average American citizen which the Government needs to keep in the dark, in regards to it's actions and the consequences of that government action.

We wouldn't want a popular uprising now, would we?

-- Xboxershorts

Truer words...

I come here because I enjoy GG's writing and that of many of the commenters.. but the one I agree with the most, I sort of hate, so it's far from a dittofest for me. -- Paul Daniel Ash

*chuckle*

And one more term of Bush-like idiocy may well have forced real change in this country. It might have been painful, but better in the long run.

Instead we now have Obama who despite his intellect doesn't seem to have a solid ideological and moral foundation.

In short, we will get competence without a humane ideology to guide it. We will suffer in the long run.

-- ramoncreager

Precisely.

I am really that jaded. I don't believe electoral politics were any better in the past (cf. the Populists and W. Jennings Bryan) and I don't believe it's going to be any better in the future. Disempowerment of the people is a feature of the system, not a bug. -- Paul Daniel Ash

Wow, well, I am not sure what to say really. So are you saying that you think the idea of a government of, by and for the people is a sham then? That the founding fathers simply intended to pull the wool over our eyes? I will concede that they didn't have a ton of faith in the masses but is our system of electoral politics, as it was conceived of, no better than an absolute monarchy? I agree that there need to be changes made to do away with those disempowering aspects of our system but those changes can be made PDA.

I think you are wrong to be so jaded. The way I see it, our representative republic has simply been compromised by an authoritarian oligarchy. Saying that it was never ours from the beginning... well that is an admission of defeat and/or a resignation to fealty IMO. I think the idea of a government of, by and for the people can be taken back and I think it can be made better and more secure for those have nots.