Quote:
Originally Posted by stoneric
We don't have the resources to be conducting two occupations but we continue to do so. I think mccain would have re-enlisted himself to get mccrackhead his 80,000 troops and we have plenty of toys in stock to "take out" Iran's imaginary nukes.
|
If that's true then I think you have an exceptionally naive view of politics... and knowing you're an intelligent man I'm perfectly ready to believe that it's not true. You can't judge the qualities of a politician's character based on their public persona any more than you can judge an actor's personal qualities based on their performance in a role. The people who pay McCain's bills are the same people who pay Obama's, and we can assume that those profit-driven people do not want America's few remaining resources stretched unprofitably thin across Iran and Russia, especially while so much money is made in the Middle East; therefore, even if McCain
was the raving lunatic the mainstream media portrayed him as (which is about as likely as Heath Ledger really being The Joker), he still would never be allowed to do such outrageous and impractical things while under the employ of the powers that be. What he would be obliged to do is exactly what Obama is doing now, meaning we're no further forwards than we would be if McCain had been the one they chose.
Quote:
Originally Posted by stoneric
We all know about the hold the two party system has in this country. I voted for Ed Clark in 1980 and I'm not even a libertarian. Here we are in 09 and not a fucking thing has changed.
|
America doesn't want change, that's why they voted for "Change(TM)" instead. Americans like glossy advertising campaigns. Most humans do, but Americans
really like 'em.
stateofkane: true, but the lesser of two evils is still evil, and people who knowingly vote for evil are gonna get exactly what they ask for.