Tony,
I think you are spot on in terms of Mike Gravel and why he is being marginalized. Every politician knows that the war is highly unpopular and that an attack on Iran is even more so...to have Gravel or anyone else for that matter continue to bring these issues up, and challenge the "popular" politicians makes them look so bad and they know it.
I am certain that nothing terrifies them more than a true anti-war candidate.

On your last statement, I apologize for not really making that concept a bit clearer in the blog. I agree with you wholeheartedly and from what I wrote I do "label". I think to a larger extent you express the message I am trying to convey here.
 

Elections are starting to turn into the old double sided coin trick. The only way to get away with it is to perform it in such away that the "mark believes they are in with a 50% chance.
The same thing is happening in Australian politics with the leader of the oppostition (Kevin Rudd) being openly dubbed Howard V.2, we called it "the illusion of choice" on 4's blog.

Great blog Jen, have a great weekend

Regards
Max
 

HA, I just got off the phone with Anna and we were discussing the upcoming election there a bit. She expressed the same sentiment in terms of choice. The "two party" system in any country basically gives us the illusion of choosing. The reality is we are simply putting into place ONE ideology.
 

Yes, precisely. Every single presidential candidate, both Republican and Democrat, is a member of the Council on Foreign Relations, except for Paul, Kucinich, and Gravel. For anyone who doesn't know, the CFR is an organization created by the cabal of bankers, such as the Rockefellers, the Morgans, and Rothschilds, who also instituted the Federal Reserve and the Income Tax. They created the CFR in the 1920s in order to infiltrate American media so as to control the message we all receive, and to therefore control which politicians we put into office. This is their sole purpose. If a presidential candidate is a member of the CFR, as nearly every candidate has been for over 50 years, they are a crony or shill for the wealthy elite. Choice is but an illusion. There's a reason that Paul, Kucinich, and Gravel have been marginalized by the mainstream media, and it's not because they are poor choices for president. It's because they are not controlled by the elite. Hillary has the Democratic ticket in the bag at this point. Ron Paul is the only candidate who offers a departure from the policies of GWB and the corporate/banking interests who control him. Hillary, Giuliani, Romney, and the rest -- they're all exactly the same as Bush. Ron Paul is our only hope.
 

"Hardly."

Denial. Gullible.
 

Jennifer,
It sounds very cynical of me, I know, but I have come to the following conclusion... a politician is a politician is a politician... it doesn't make a bit of difference which party they belong to.
The 'will' of the American people means nothing to these people. They don't even 'pretend' to care.
For anyone to think one party over the other is going to make some astounding, profound change in our country or leadership is more than a bit naive. That's why I can't understand all the fighting and blog wars and hate between 'conservatives' and 'liberals'... they are the same wolves in slightly different shades of sheep's clothing. (so to speak)
I'm at a loss as to where my vote is going in '08.

Peace My Friend :) oxox
 

I'm also at a complete loss as to who I'm going to vote for---this political bullshit is making me sick....EVERY DAY!
 

I think the only positive in the situation facing our country is that it is starting to open some peoples eyes. Not nearly enough people, but at least it’s a start. I hear a lot of conservatives and liberals stating that they are disgusted with both parties. I think a lot of the problem is fear. Fear that if they don’t support the party that they are most comfortable with the other will win. The lesser of two evils philosophy. The most important issue should be supporting the United States Constitution, which neither party has been committed to in decades. So most people go through the political platforms, and weigh them against there own personal opinions on morality, and self interest. They don’t question an issue on whether it is constitutional or not.

We won’t see a takeover of the government by one political party. It will be the conjunction of both major parties that will accomplish this. Look at all of the acts that are the most contrevsial and unconstitutional. The patriot act was supported by every Senator but one. The war in Iraq was supported by both parties. Hearing anything from the Dems about Directive 51. Sure they separate from each other and make big speeches and create fanfare later. This keeps people distracted, and polarizes them into two sides both fervently supporting to parties with the same agenda.

They can strike down our Bill of Rights point by point, by using tactics of bait and switch. One party censorship- FOR THE COMMON GOOD another party gun control- FOR THE COMMON GOOD all the way down the line, and they can get half of the people to unite behind there platform on issues that are completely unconstitutional. This is what “democracy” has turned into. The people chopping apart the very principles that keep them free, because they really think there side has a better plan for America than the founders, who anticipated this, and gave us these protection so that our republic had a chance to remain free.

Look at who really runs this country, and I think we already realize it is not us. Soon perhaps we will realize it is not simply our politicians either. They are beholding to other interest that have nothing to do with the best interest of this country.

Look at all of the connections between Bush I, Clinton I, Bush II, and the soon to be Clinton II. See where those lead. Compare Hillary’s voting record to Bush’s, I think you will find it a bit to uncomfortable to chalk it up as simply coincidence.

What we need is for conservatives and liberals to stop supporting both of the major political parties, start supporting candidates that don’t have a plan for America that is at odds with our constitution, and take our country back before it is to late.
 

While I agree wholeheartedly a politician is just a politician and not to be trusted to follow the will of the people, there is Dennis Kucinich, who I truly believe could change the course of out country. Strength thru Peace, what a concept.
 

lKucinich 2 major problems.
hypocrical stance on the second amendment and his oath to office. the desire to violate the oth to protect the constitution and to then attempt to go against it is in fact the first violation that should disqualify him.

2. He is catholic and as a Catholic President he would be forced to either go the route of JFK and get assassinated for disobediecne to rome or he would choose to bow down to rome and the pope would run this country.

Sorry those two major factors stand against him.
 

I swear, if I hear one more person talk about Catholicism as being a fault I am going to scream..

JFK was one of our greatest presidents, and the WASPS were reed with envy and hated him for it, simply because he refused to swear on any Bible other than his own..

Catholicism, and religion in general, has NOTHING to do with what makes a president great or not.

It's character and intelligence and charisma and common sense and respect for our Constitution and LOVE for the people that DOES make a good president...

Just look at GW. He's a devout Christian who's royally screwed this country in more ways than I can count!

A GOOD president shouldn't "bow down" to ANY of their respective religious associations. It's fine to use a religion as a moral compass when leading, but completely WRONG to allow it to dictate law and policy..

It's HIGH time that we as a people stopped allowing such narrow mindedness to hinder their choice for president and their representative.. Look at their policies, NOT their religions..

Because a good president should clearly separate the 2.

I wish people could see that..

Peace and luv,
Janie
 

Gee Robin, it appears as if you and I have come to the same conclusion. It is interesting when you think about the recent history of politics in this country...the agenda has been slow, methodical, and cunning, however it really has no party affiliation. We just think it does, which is exactly what they want us to think. Apparently it is only fashionable to stand up as an American politician in this country when you know you will loose. What has been most disturbing to me in terms of the Dems is that they could stop this war yesterday! Yank the funding, as a party they have the power to do ti, yet they continue to fund this war, leave this president in office, and do little to nothing except politicize issues that need real change. It is time to use the power granted to them under the constitution...the power of the purse!
 

And THAT sums it up right there in what you just said...makes you wonder what the real thinking is...and who is really in control.
 

Who is really in control:


 

that would be this guy.

David Rockefeller is a Knight of Malta.
that would make him subservient to the guy above.
 

Americans seem to like it...I think it is more of a case of Americans don't seem to notice. We are fed a nice neat clean war, where patriotism is all you need to protect you from injury, justify the murder of thousands, and the worst humanitarian crisis in the world is never brought to your attention.
Oddly I post a lot of my blogs elsewhere, I do not get the same kind of response there as I do here, the majority of people (from the left) totally bag on me for my disdain of Dems et al. I am called names, challenged on my sources, and told I am full of crap! LOL! What that tells me is that people who are faithful to the "party" are just as stupid (I do not use that word lightly) as those who voted for Bush because he is a "Christian."
 

Any chance you could tell me a bit more about "single issue politics." I can surmise what you mean just from the definition of the individual words, but if you could explain how that works I would be most interested.
 

Ahhh...ok I see your point, I think there is great value in working at the local level. Thank you for taking the time to give me a "real life" example..sometimes I need that so I can actually make a decent response! LOL...
 

The links dont seem to be working for me...I guess I got here to slow.

sob.

Its fine.

sob
 

Aww Jake, that is too bad, is it the videos you can't see? Let me know I will give you the URL
 

The problem as I see it Jen, is that Bush and the GOP have so debased the executive and legislative branches, that it doesn't take much to look better than these guys. Coupled to that is the takeover of the republican party by religious extremists, and the continued centrist control of the democratic party.

Logic, empathy, equality, courage; it's all being filtered by a corrupted mass media system and an education system that favors authoritarianism over critical thinking. This is why the horrible philosophy of social darwinism is still alive and well in America. Progressives are slowly making progress on the campaign influence front, and that is happening by countering the campaign finance machines like the DCCC, who sidelined many grassroots progressive candidates in 2006. Instead we got more blue dog democrats who might as well be in the republican party, like Lieberman.
 

I have never really followed the DCCC, but I can say that even without that bit of info, it has become grossly apparent to me that your assessment is true. We basically had 6 years of no oversight and no one tattling on each other which is why they have gotten so out of control. It is amazing! The experience of the past six years has left a very bad taste in my mouth for one party control over government regardless of what that party "is". I think we will regret it if we end up with a Democratic Congress, Senate and White house. I would much prefer some kind of balance, at least if they are pointing out each other's flaws, we may have some idea of what is going on.
 

God Cynic, to tell you the truth I would have a lot more faith in him if he had less $$$. The bottom line is that we have lost control of our country to corporate interests and those at the top are going to have to pay back those "favors" someday. I think where Americans really need to focus their attention if they want to see lasting change for good is to take that power back. The only way for us to do that is to recognize that candidates at the top are likely selling their souls to the devil so to speak.
I keep hammering away on this topic...our enemy is not the right or left, the conservatives or the liberals, the Democrats or the Republicans, our enemy is corporate power and control. If you look at any policy foreign or domestic there is someone getting filthy rich somewhere and not in the way of true free markets or Capitalism, so many of these industries are heavily subsided by both sides of the isle, nothing free about that!
 

wow...that Naomi Wolf interview was a little longer than I wanted to watch initially...but she is absolutely right with the history and direction we are taking...and she pointed out quite a few of the things I've been saying for years...she is very well spoken and kept it intersting enough to watch the whole thing...hope you don't mind, but I'm going to post that video.

Very good point...this is not a partisan issue and we can't afford to split hairs down the party line...we need to restore the Constitutaion and Democracy as it was intended and return the power of the throne to the people it is supposed to be serving.
 

Mike Post post post away, I always encourage people to take videos, take the whole damn blog, I just post it to get the info out there...thank you!
 

I've been saying the very same thing for years now. People just invoke Godwin's Law and move on, thinking I'm loony. But the parallels are astounding. It's as if the Bush Administration is going by a Nazi playbook, checking off one step after another. People who haven't read history and don't know the Constitution don't understand what the problem is. Just as the people of Germany hadn't. Ever see Cabaret? But to those of us who can connect the dots, it is quite alarming!
 

I found her comparisons to other countries very interesting. Funny, it appears that every "great civilization" goes through the same cycle over and over again. Shit, you would think we would pull our heads out once every hundred years or so!
 

The problem is that people use the experience of their own lifetimes to judge risks and probabilities. This is why people fail to plan for natural disasters like hurricanes and tsunamis if one hasn't occurred in their area for a few decades. It's why they do not stay vigilant against government growth. And it's why they become alarmed at natural climate change. 100+ year events are seen as a near impossibility, even though they are usually inevitable. Like the fact that the Yellowstone super-volcano will erupt again one day... but if anyone living in the area has the foresight to plan for the potentiality, they'll be considered a nut. It's really a lack of education in both history and risk analysis that is at fault.
 

Another great example is the LA basin...no water...nope not enough to sustain that ridiculous area, truth is CA has only been as "wet" as it has been for the past hundred years or so...studies show that the majority of Southern CA has been desert.
 

Absolutely, you could go on and on about these things... prior to about 30 years ago, Florida was ravaged by continual category 5 hurricanes, and we're going into another 30-year cycle now, but in the intervening time, has that stopped people from building under-engineered structures and moving there in droves? The Pacific Northwest and Alaska have been obliterated by tsunamis every few hundred years (there's a major fault just offshore), but does anyone in Seattle, Vancouver, Portland, or other coastal cities ever think about that? Worldwide and regional sea levels rise and fall naturally all the time, but does that stop people from building right on the beach or in dredged swamp-land? Et cetera, et cetera. We are destined to see continual suffering and death because people are just so short-sighted!
 

he Pacific Northwest and Alaska have been obliterated by tsunamis every few hundred years (there's a major fault just offshore), but does anyone in Seattle, Vancouver, Portland, or other coastal cities ever think about that?
- yes, some have yes.
 

Firstly I will be buying the book in the 1st video.

Secondly, Hillary is a war pig and she is ANYTHING but FOR the PEOPLE. She honestly makes me ill to my stomach.

I didn't know that Gravel was barred from a debate. How th fuck can that be regulation??? It is fucking CENSORSHIP and a HUGE violation of 1st ammndments. My only hope is that Kucinich takes up where he left off.

I am so sad today. I just saw a video of Peter Stark apologizing, nearly in tears for his comments the other day he made about the S-Chip bill and the hypocrisy of Bush for veto on the pretense of lack of funding when he then turned around and asked for an additional $42 Billion for the war.

For anyone who hasn't seen it watch it below...it's only 2 minutes long!



He then apologized and by the end of the apology you could hear him starting to break down. It broke my heart...just like NBC has done by barring one of the only vocal dissenters in Congress.

AHHHHHHHH!!!!!

Peace.

Great post Jenn!
 

It is so fascinating Liberty...every single anti-war politician is continually marginalized, ridiculed and minimized. It is deliberate and disgusting. That alone should be enough to make the American people wake up to the fact that we can't trust our media AT ALL!
 

That alone should be enough to make the American people wake up to the fact that we can't trust our media AT ALL!
please see my latest blog for a fantastic example of this.

respect,
4
 

I believe President Bush's war policy results from a unique blend of insufferable arrogance and unprecedented incompetence. This makes him a very dangerous man. Add to that the Patriot Act and its successors, and the National Security Presidential Directive 51, and we have a serious problem on our hands.

I don't believe it is accurate to lump all the viable presidential candidates under the misguided governmental philosophies of President Bush.
 

Well, I would not lup all of therm in there, however it is very clear who will and will not continue this madness and extend it with Iran. Google any candidate and AIPAC.
 

You take it to the Supreme Court, who is now in control of the Supreme Court?
http://www.adherents.com/adh_sc.html

the answer is the POPE.
 

The people hated Saddam, but he won election after election. The people hate Castro, but he wins election after election. The people hated Hitler, but he won election after election. When the people hate the leader, but he wins elections anyway, do you really think it is the fault of the people? Watch the video above with Naomi Wolf and read her book. In a closed society, elections are still held, but the results are fixed or the voters or counters are intimidated into ensuring the dictator wins. It's a narcissistic self-validation and illusion of support. If you believe elections are truly free in this country, then why has nearly every president in the past 50 years come from an elite three-thousand member group instead of out of the populace of three-hundred-million? Do you think that elite group might just have some sway over who gets elected so that it is always one of their members?
 

i think you watch too much fox news
 

Uhhh Excuse me, I have already been to the Middle east and am going back in ten to twelve months...how many times have you been?
 

pimped this blog by bulletin. excellent. excellent. excellent.






 

Thank you so much...it really is rather scary, very few in Congress are discussing presidential powers in a substantive way. Nancey P and Harry R have the authority to do something...all I can say is it is apparent they prefer the status quo.
 

Of course they prefer the status quo... they're beholden to the same interests as Bush.
 

I think you have hit the nail squarely. Trading dictators right for left still leaves you with dictators. Sadly far too many of these politicians are little more than puppets for big money interests that got them elected in the first place.
 

In my opinion, the best bet for real change is Obama. He's the smartest guy in the room and he gets it. Hillary is just Bush lite.
 

Obama is Hillary lite.
 

You're right. Not only are they nearly the same person with nearly the same political, economic, and social affiliations -- but they are ALL missing the point. (Ron Paul may be a slight exception and I say may only until I read more). We've lost our intended purpose as a united group of democratic states. We've become a large watered-down version of what our founders intended. Not only have we lost so many of our personal rights with rationalization after rationalization of breaks in what the Constitution provides -- but we are taxed out of our ability to do good in our own communities on our own. (I believe in many social programs, but think we have far overshot what we can feasibly do well.) Everytime I post I recommend that everyone reads a book by Matt Carson called "On A Hill They Call Capital". It suggests a peaceable but profound revolution that I think could really happen. I'm now a "Grandson of Liberty" (a title used in the book) and think everyone else should be as well!