Both Parties Suck  

What intelligent commentary. It'll play great with the MTV crowd. And anyone else who doesn't like to confront difficult choices.

Don't be stupid, Fellowship.

Your conclusion is indeed correct-- both parties suck-- but your reasons supplied are void of anything resembling intelligent commentary-- void of anything approaching why the two parties are what they are-- but complete with clichés and talking points (so you don't have actually think about what you're saying), and a general regressive slide into the Fellowship of old. Understanding is key-- never forget that. So let's have some here.

Er . . .felowship . . . you forgot that 'welfare is just slavery' business
oh and, yeah . . . how dare those Democrats care about the tax cuts for the rich?!?! and the Corporate tax loopholes? They are fomenting class warfar cause they are really a buncha Commies . . . . they stare at that big house and say, 'after the Revolution, comrads, that will be yours' . . . they seeth in hatred of anybody with money . . . . no Democrat knows how to be a business man, they just know how to take your money!

When Democrats say 'Civilization' what they really mean is vast Social Engineering where 'Christians' have to renounce 'god' in public and we will soon be implanted with numbered microchips . . . and one of us will bear the mark of the beast . . .

But those Republicanslove child labor and want to do away with governance entirely . . . they pine for the days of Standard Oil . . .
(hmm . . .its hard to be 'over-the-top' with Republicans)

anyway,

Yeah they all suck . . . and so does capitalism . . . but like Capitalism (tempered by decent regulation) the Democrats seem to suck less than the rest.

I think the choice in this election is choosing the higher value between Kerry = 0 and Bush = 0 divided by 50. They're probably equally bad choices, but Kerry feels better.




I'm so happy: I'll be of voting age when Hillary and Barack run.

fellowship, i want to say that i support you in this... i will still vote, mostly because i think that GW is incompetent... i thought so four years ago, and i still feel that way. i'm not sure i am 100% for kerry/edwards, but it's more than how much i support bush.

i was mentioning this to friends earlier today, and i hate to say it, but i miss the canadian national elections. somehow, that country went through elections without the rancor and disdain that the democrats and republicans show for each other down here. i mean, i'm not pro-bush (obviously), which APPARENTLY means that i am...

anti-freedom
anti-economy
anti-family
anti-religion
anti-marriage
anti-children
anti-education
anti-security (or worse, pro-terrorist)

am i missing anything? maybe it helps to have more than two friggin' parties, i don't know. and any canadians can say that there is mudslinging all they want, but down here, the conventions and such turn it into an art form.

We all agree the system has a lot of faults. Moving right along, the last almost 4 years have been a disaster in almost every front. I want to change that so I'm goimg to do the best thing left to do which is:
Vote to kick the Bush administration out of office.

I could take the easy or wimpy road and sit out these elections, but then I'd be doing this country a disservice by refusing to participate in the process that so differentiates us from so many other countries in the world. The same process the ones who will not participate in will be taking for granted.

Don't vote, don't whine about the country's state of affairs because you failed to show up.

Which country were you in? The past three Canadian elections have featured extremely polarizing campaigns (each worse than the previous one.)

The next one, when the minority government falls in about a year, will be off the chart.

why, i was in toronto for the past five, and perhaps i should make myself more clear... the canadians ain't got jack on the u.s. for mudslinging and attack ad campaigns. now, if you want to talk parliament, sure, they broke out in nigh-fisticuffs weekly.

Voting is not just "expressing an opinion." That's more MTV-generation nonsense. It's your civic responsibility.

You act as if it's some great revelation you've had that political parties and politicians aren't that great. It's not, fellowship. All the rest of us have known that from the beginning.

All I hear from you is "wah wah wah." How about this: Why not find a third-party presidential candidate that will be on the Texas ballot, and let us know why you think they're better than either of the major candidates.

I still fail to see how Kerry can suck as much as Bush, given that Bush has a definitive record of his 4 years of catastrophic blunders, yet Kerry has not had his chance at the helm.

I dont believe this is about Kerry/Bush, this is about a disgruntled Republican not having the guts to vote for something other than his status-quo, and then denying it under the banner of personal standards.

I can send you some of my 'psychopharmaceutical'* pills if it's bothering you this much.

*Hey pfflam, I can spell big words even when under heavy medication. G-d help the lot of you when I recover from my mental illnesses!

Problem for the country is that both partys are being ran by their extremist wings and regular middle class American Joe is in the middle of a lot of these issues. No one is representing the middle,or the country they are representing their special interest. Maybe this is why we swing back and forth with the excutive branch as a check on these extreme views. yes both partys suck!

Its not about YOU. Its about your country and the rest of the frigging world. Wake UP.

Dont you realise that in this whole world, the only people who want Bush to win are the Repubs. 6 billion other 'worthless' people who you seem to show no regard for cannot stand this man. Perhaps America could have realised post 911 that the rest of the world knows *who* you are and *where* you are. If you didn't go around pissing off half the world through your inlooking, arrogant, powermad $$$whore politicians, you wouldn't have been 911ed, and you wouldn't be alone now mopping up the shit in Iraq. What part of this don't you (not you in particular Fellows) understand?

Bush sucks - confirmed.

Kerry sucks - not confirmed. If he does you can get rid of him in 4 years.

There is no decision to be made when you put your brain back in.

Personally Fship, all I hear from you with regards to Democrats is a handful of tired cliches . . . I hate it as well when Dems automatically assume they have 'the black vote' . . . . people are individuals as well as members of groups . . .
. . .
all in all, the 'group membership' idea is inadequate to describe people unless you go all the way up to the top group: members of the group of 'matter/animated/sentient beings' and even that is inadequate.
-Unless you are addressing differences in order to emelliorate problems that really exist as a result of real differences: (the people aren't necessarily different but differences create problems for people)

However, there is only one thing worse than rhetoric that divides people into groups without distinguishing reasons and real differences that the groups exhibit (because there really are different groups though the lines shift), and that is the rhetoric which unifies all under a false catagory for purposes obliterating real differences: 'one America' is correct, except that it obliterates the realities of the differences between people . . .
that would be no problem for me except the purpose to which it is being used . . . .it is used to overlook real differences
Luckily there are some who are willing to not love the false gleeming Idol of abstration and actually declare that there are real differences that demand to be acknowledged and are a part of what it means to all-live-together.

Just remember, the main strategy of Totalitarian systems is to attempt to oblterate differences and make people fit into the 'one', whatever that be: the 'volk', the 'party', the 'people', etc.

The converse is true as well, that if division is stressed in order to obliterate commonality for purposes of gain than I too object . . . unless the realities of one of those 'different' aspects of our culture is to the detriment of other parts of that whole . . . and, unfortunately, I think that that the real differences that drive us all apart can be handled better . . . but first they need to be acknowledged.

It is unfortunate that the balance twixt 'we are all one' and "we should all act as if we cared about each other as if we were all one" is in itself so divise and bitter . . . but at least the conflict, so far, is continual . . .
I think that that is good, when one side wins handily in that fight then it is timed to be afraid for our civilization
and unfortunately, the grip that the right has on all the media (with a few exceptions) is so strong, liberalism is so demonized that I truly fear that it may be a very one sided argument in the future . . .

BTW, it is odd that you mention the 'poor' vote being Democrat, because I think that the lower economic rung has probably been Republican for a long time . . . that is the 'working poor' seem to think that Bush is just one of them

Also BTW, I went from beng a rabid Conservative to a rabid socialist before I settled squarely on what I would call a Social-libertarian, economic-moderate-Liberal who cares about the notion of balance and cares about the health of Public Institutions such as Education, and health and the infrastructure . .. transportation beyond the automobiles etc etc
I also believe that completely unregulated business leads inherently towards abuse
just as complete state-operation and control leads to abuse
Wherre does that fit in the cliche fests: the notion of balance?

Probably not in any of the slander talking points huh?

That's "malarcky talking-point #56" from the RNC . .

Kerry is NOT beyond the 'mainstream' and is NOT radically 'Liberal' . . . he is NOT a socialist . . . he is pretty damn middle-of-the-road!

Whereas, we have seen allready that the Bush administration, no matter how much they try in this convention to paint themselves as 'uniters' and moderates are completely extremely SOMETHING NEW . . . cause they sure as helll aren't old-school Conservative . . . and whatever they are, they do it in an extreme and divisive way.

Fellowship is hopeless.

I've spent hundreds of hours talking to him-- many of which devoted to personal values and interests of mine, such as racial, class, and gender equality. This is more of a personal stab in the back for me. Although in all honesty, he never did understand the fact that people of different racial and economic backgrounds actually exist-- and that marginalized and under-served people need representation just as much as the power-brokers in control. Not everyone shares his decidedly bourgeois bachelor lifestyle-- complete with a spacious new suburban home, fast sports coupe, expensive niche computer, and fancy electronics. He can ignore the vote because he can afford to. Many others cannot. The Democrats' efforts to serve those people, however meager and pathetic, do not amount to simply "playing the race, gender, or class card." It's a slap in the face to believe so. We as a party need MORE constituents who believe in our basic beliefs-- however poorly executed they are.

I hate to say it, but you have the blood, sweat, and tears of anyone who unjustly suffers in this country on you.. through your non-participation. And this applies to everyone else (especially those who vote Republican, or Democrats who lack the courage to actually act on their convictions). <-- (Although I realize the political realities they face)

I would leave the US then. No candidate has or ever will exist.

Well, let's be honest. He lives in Texas. His vote doesn't count.

But his attitude offends me. He's willing to endorse the status quo through non-participation rather than vote to change things incrementally. He's willing to stick his head in the clouds rather than face the realities and make a tough decision. He gives up. He's exactly what those in power want in "the people" -- utterly apathetic voters resulting in a low turnout. Perhaps Texas *could* be in contention if so many people didn't feel the same way as you-- tricked by the establishment into feeling nothing you can do-- no one you can vote for-- will help.

No, you probably just saw the words "balance" and "moderation" and went gaga. But if that's a similar political philosophy, then you certainly have a candidate to vote for.

Hey Fellowship. Long time no see.

What about this third party then? What would it be like, politically-speaking? Where would you position it between the other political parties?

(Cool if you can't be bothered to take the time- just curious.)

Fellowship. My man.

I'll have a shot of Zubrówka if you're going to the bar.

Fellowship did you ever stop to consider that the middleclass ( that's most of us ) need someone other than the republican fair that's been gracing the whitehouse in the last oh say 30 years. If you'll look closely the middleclass is fast becoming the poor and it looses ground everytime we have a republican in office.

I'm not saying that the democrats are saints. And it is sort of voting for the lesser of two evils. However there's another word for it : SURVIVAL!

I don't buy that. Who then is gaining ground when the repubs are in office then, the ultra rich? OK, back that up.

If middle classes are losing ground why do they still vote repub, they cant be doing that bad.

If middle class is the new poor, where did the poor go, the 3rd world? Why are they voting repub?

Are there enough ultra-rich to give the 50:50 split? There must be a hell of alot of ultra-rich in the USA then.

You can edit and so can I.

Good for you fellowship.

I believe we've finally identified Common Man.
Anyone else feeling trolled?

Fellowship ain't the sharpest tool in the shed-- that's for sure. But it's not entirely his fault. Sure he's being easily swayed by essentially liberal rhetoric at the 2004 RNC (apart from Zell "Emperor Palpatine" Miller and Richard "Make Kerry Shoot His Dog" Cheney.) But that was a remarkably persuasive speech by Bush-- which upon critical review does not hold up when compared to what his policies actually do. But hey-- don't think about that, Fellows. Just nod your head and support the President!