"Freedom" thread or something

I would, but I'd refuse to be a soldier anyway.

lol like soldiers would refuse that order.

A Person wrote: That is true, and as I've said before I am a libertarian socialist, so I have a dim view of reform as a whole.

interesting...

I have a dim view of reform as well.  consider me a financial agnostic.  I have a great, well paying job that is recession proof. I will never be laid off, not many can do what I do as well as I do it. And thanks to our worshipping of the all mighty college education.. fewer and fewer enter my trade which means I become more and more valuable as the years go by. Forecast are as my and the generation above me retire we will have a shortage of tradesmen on order of 50% Want to make real money and have real job security. Drop out of college and learn a trade.


As far as everyone else.  Why care about those who continually shoot themselves in the foot by voting in those who could give two sh*ts about they live above or below the poverty line. For those politicians have hood winked them into thinking that worrying about who is sleeping or married who is more important than their own financial well being.  In all honesty we are so far down the path of destroying the middle class and becoming a country of haves and have nots it would take more than one President or a progressive Congress to correct.  To me it is a hopeless fight.

While I really could care less about financial/economic reform... social matters I care a GREAT deal about. They are not victims of being duped by those supposedly care for them.. but are victims of the lasting predisposition this country has towards hatred, bigotry, violence, and religious evangelism.

micky wrote: the question is... will any serious financial reform happen under any President. Even if he (or Hillary ) were so inclined.. and not just playing lip service to the masses...  IMO there is zero chance it would get through Congress. About as much chance as having Congress pass term limits upon themselves.

That is true, and as I've said before I am a libertarian socialist, so I have a dim view of reform as a whole. However, Sanders is pretty open about how he needs his supporters to get out and support similarly minded candidates for all offices, including the most local of politics. The r/GrassrootsSelect subreddit has done a good job starting to work towards that. I think the ultimate goal of his campaign has been to build a movement, if he is successful in that it will still be a success even if he does not get nominated for the general.

emigre80 wrote: Oh, I thought you were saying you did not find Clinton inspirational yourself and therefore could understand why others don't.   I have been arguing with a friend on facebook (and if he doesn't stop being such an ass I may "unfriend" him soon) who keeps saying that Clinton is an awful candidate, has done terrible things, is a corporate shill, etc. All the standard Republican talking points, except he's a Sanders fan. I don't get it, I really don't, how people can listen to her and then believe all this nonsense.  It just goes to show how far the right-wing bullsh*t has permeated political discourse, because he really thinks he thought of this all on his own instead of swallowing what the media has been feeding him for years.

I think it is fair for a Sanders supporter to not like Clinton, but not for right-wing talking points. Personally I have a lot of problems with her foreign policy. Her support of the war in Iraq, her advocating military action in Libya (not even considering the video of her gloating over the death of Gaddafi), her tacit support of the coup d'etat in Guatemala that has lead to widespread privatization of natural resources and violence (particularly femicide and violence towards environmental activists combating the privatization) are starters.
Domestically, I don't see why she hasn't embraced Sanders' views on imprisonment of black vs white people because he is depressingly right. I also think that people who support Sanders due to his pro-LGBT advocacy ever since becoming a mayor (even at a time when it was not a popular opinion) should support Clinton for her recent adoption of pro-LGBT stances as well. Now that we have had a feasible candidate running on a grassroots platform who is advocating serious financial reform it seems to me to be doing too little to support Clinton's much more moderate stance.
Overall I just think Sanders' supporters are people who want change and don't see it happening under Clinton.

far too many of them, and dammit, we give each and every one of them a vote.

speaking of FB... I banned myself from FB actually.  I have tended to be a bit overrbearing in my politics and have been unfriended by right leaning friends.  I think the candidates are fools and destructive ... however.. someone has to support them and have tended to make that leap of association in my posts. I have tried, successfully I think, to try to tone it down here.

But yeah.. candidates who think that a white Christian country is what God or the founding fathers intended this country to be and attempts to use the constitution and thus the laws of this country to ban or discriminate AMERICANS based on their race, religion or sexual perference is a bigot...  so what does that make those that do not repudiate them or actively support them?

Oh, I thought you were saying you did not find Clinton inspirational yourself and therefore could understand why others don't.

I personally find Clinton inspiring, if only for the way she has stood up under 25 years of right-wing attacks and still stayed strong.  I would have thrown in the towel years ago.  I admire strength under pressure and she has that in spades.

emigre80 wrote: I am very sad indeed that Sanders - whom I admire - has descended to the Trumpian-level of politics.  For heaven's sake - "She started it"? I thought his brand was to claim he was above all that kind of nonsense.

indeed. Goes back to the point I made earlier Terri.  What will happen when facing the full court press of the vicious and could care less about facts (or common decency) GOP establishment and their attack dogs. Nice guy he might be.. he has not faced, not in Vermont for God's sake, that kind of petty viciousness.  Clinton has for the last 20 years All of her skeletons have been aired out to the point of most caring not a f**k to hear yet again. What about Bernies.. they are have them.. we all have them. 

I fear he would wilt and fail under that..he wouldn't be the first....like Dukakis... thus coming across as unfit in the eyes of the general electorate...and thus losing an election that the Democrats should win easily against two fringe extremist GOP candidates who have little appeal to moderates.  This isn't McCain and Romney they are facing here.. Republican centrists...those two are f**king right wing nuts.




Edited by micky - April 09 2016 at 06:33