D. Armenta
PlagmanWho is ultimately to blame for the "bailout bill"'s passage, America? We are.
We are.
-For having blind loyalty to a party without checking up on that party's candidate.
-For letting television tell us what to think instead of thinking for ourselves.
-For being lazy and uninformed (I'm going to vote for the black guy because he's the first black guy to run/I'm going to vote for the woman because she's a woman/I'm going to vote for this guy because he looks like a nice guy.
-For being cynical and passing that on to our kids (You can't fight City Hall, junior!)
-For voting for "the lesser of the two evils" instead of investigating our other options.
Did you know that right now there are actually two other candidates running for president besides Obama and McCain?
If you get all of your news from television, you probably didn't know that.
That is because every major television network is either owned or heavily sponsored by big corporations. Big corporations who have finally achieved their goal of creating Democratic and Republican candidates who have pretty much exactly the same views.
Now that both of those party candidates have shown the American public what they really think about "average Joes" ---insert a giant middle finger here and aim it at us-- with the passing of the bailout bill, maybe we'll wake up and take some action.
For a real shock, go to Ralph Nader's website . The shock part comes when you realize that Nader has specific, viable plans to solve many of our problems. The plans are presented in a plain-speaking, no-nonsense way. Each idea is supported by a plan to allocate money that already exists instead of hitting the taxpayers up for it or just printing up some more.
The guy makes complete sense--yet he's rarely seen on any major T.V. channels, and has been blocked from participating in the presidential debates by both parties. Nader is a candidate for president but he gets absolutely NO air time. One glance at what he proposes to do for the people will tell you why. He wants to get us out from under the thumb of corporate rule.
Nader proposes a speculation tax of one half of one percent on those who bet on the stock market with millions every day. Right now, there is no tax on that. You and I have to pay tax when we play the lottery or gamble in a casino --why is it that these fat cats can gamble with stock and pay no tax?!
The amount raised from that tax alone would raise 500 billion dollars.
Of course, if you'd rather pick up the government's tab yourselves, just keep watching TV and remaining clueless. Not only will we continue to bail out the wealthy, but our kids will too.
It's not too late. And you CAN fight City Hall. Nader's been doing it for decades, successfully.
-For having blind loyalty to a party without checking up on that party's candidate.
-For letting television tell us what to think instead of thinking for ourselves.
-For being lazy and uninformed (I'm going to vote for the black guy because he's the first black guy to run/I'm going to vote for the woman because she's a woman/I'm going to vote for this guy because he looks like a nice guy.
-For being cynical and passing that on to our kids (You can't fight City Hall, junior!)
-For voting for "the lesser of the two evils" instead of investigating our other options.
If you get all of your news from television, you probably didn't know that.
That is because every major television network is either owned or heavily sponsored by big corporations. Big corporations who have finally achieved their goal of creating Democratic and Republican candidates who have pretty much exactly the same views.
Now that both of those party candidates have shown the American public what they really think about "average Joes" ---insert a giant middle finger here and aim it at us-- with the passing of the bailout bill, maybe we'll wake up and take some action.
For a real shock, go to Ralph Nader's website . The shock part comes when you realize that Nader has specific, viable plans to solve many of our problems. The plans are presented in a plain-speaking, no-nonsense way. Each idea is supported by a plan to allocate money that already exists instead of hitting the taxpayers up for it or just printing up some more.
The guy makes complete sense--yet he's rarely seen on any major T.V. channels, and has been blocked from participating in the presidential debates by both parties. Nader is a candidate for president but he gets absolutely NO air time. One glance at what he proposes to do for the people will tell you why. He wants to get us out from under the thumb of corporate rule.
Securities speculation -- buying and selling blocks of derivatives to profit from rapid fluctuations in price -- is one cause of the escalation in oil prices at the pump, the mortgage industry meltdown, and the dot.com bust.
As economist Dean Baker points out, the securities speculation tax would make the tax code more fair since most financial speculation is conducted either directly or indirectly by wealthy people.
source: votenader.orgAs economist Dean Baker points out, the securities speculation tax would make the tax code more fair since most financial speculation is conducted either directly or indirectly by wealthy people.
Nader proposes a speculation tax of one half of one percent on those who bet on the stock market with millions every day. Right now, there is no tax on that. You and I have to pay tax when we play the lottery or gamble in a casino --why is it that these fat cats can gamble with stock and pay no tax?!
The amount raised from that tax alone would raise 500 billion dollars.
Of course, if you'd rather pick up the government's tab yourselves, just keep watching TV and remaining clueless. Not only will we continue to bail out the wealthy, but our kids will too.
It's not too late. And you CAN fight City Hall. Nader's been doing it for decades, successfully.
Reality TV
The Jeepney Stop
First Time Mum
Hunt Famous
Orble Post of the Day
Fat Cult
Techbreak
Not that I get to vote at all in the next US election.
Nor does it bother me who wins.
I do like to quote Simpson's here:
"Don't blame me, I voted for Kodos.'
The roll on benefit to me so far has been lower interest rates. That is like getting a pay rise.
The Florida Keys and Everglades
The Black Sheep Chronicles
What constitutes bad manners?
The male mystique
Debate Fan
Actually, Nader's got a fair shot at winning. If enough people get to hear about his policies he'll win by a landslide.
He garnered a respectable percentage of votes in the 2004 election, which led to the Democratic media attacking Nader as a "spoiler", taking away votes that otherwise would have been for Al Gore (which is complete hogwash). We yanks are getting really tired of being taken for suckers by our pwn government.
No, the major networks don't give any of the numerous "Third Parties" any air time. Just Democrats or Republicans. This is corporate strategy being employed in politics; act like no one else is worthy of attention.
Nader's viable alternatives to the bailout:
-The above-mentioned speculation tax
-Implement 6-month troop withdrawal from Middle East (Nader wants to get our troops back home, then sit down with Iraqi, Afghan and Pakistan leaders to negotiate peace)
-Negotiate with world leaders to implement a carbon emissions tax (Nader suggests $50.00/ton per country, but maintains all countries must agree to the same tax to keep lower or non-taxing countries from being a dumping ground) In short- pay to pollute.
-Hold corporations/banks/lenders accountable for their losses while rewarding the prudent lenders who didn't overextend their credit on ripoff loans to average and below average homeowners.
..and much more. Check out the site. It's a crying shame that Nader, who's been a consumer advocate (fighting for our side) for 40 years is being effectively muzzled by the corporate hogs he wants to regulate.
Thanks all for your comments!
Hunt Famous
Orble Post of the Day
Fat Cult
Techbreak
But that would never work - they'd all just sort themselves out into two parties anyway, right?
I looked at Nader's website, he's only on in 45 states? Is it possible for him to win?
I notice that Nader correctly predicted this meltdown.
I really like Nader's points, but it's too bad that he's ignored.
Also, Nader doesn't dislike the idea of a bailout, I think he recognizes that it's important, but he wants there to be requirements, which I agree with:
Absolutely. Unfortunately, the banks and investment banks are trying to avoid this. Apparently, it's in the new bailout bill, but as a minor provision or something.
- No golden parachutes and get out of jail free cards for guilty executives "
This should be a given. I can't believe that those executives get away, scot-free.
D, I wrote a post about this topic today, mainly to highlight an excellent free podcast from NPR about the bailout. They cover the idea of stock warrants and why the market could be liable for a lot more damage. I think you'll enjoy it!
All Knowing Geek
On Nader having a shot at winning, I have a better shot at winning the US Open (tennis or golf, doesn't matter).
First off, he's not on the ballot of every state. He's only on 4-5 ballots now. Second, how many third party candidates won a major election in the US? Jesse Ventura in Minnesota is all well and good but do Lieberman and Bernie Sanders honestly count?
All he can do is disrupt the Dems again. He swings say 10% of the vote in any state he's on the ballot, most likely they're democratic votes. Obama/McCain run in the 40% range each, then did he impact the election? You bet he did.
No offense. I could give a damn who wins between Obama or McCain because I don't see major change coming from either one. Nader's more in line with me financially speaking. I don't agree with the bailout also, don't like NAFTA or the WTO for our country's interests, and don't want big corporations getting every tax break in existence yet still have the ability to move jobs to Mexico or wherev (did I mention I also don't like NAFTA?).
I just think its naive to think Nader has a shot. Its not Greece and even Greek democracy wasn't Greek democracy. This is a representative democracy with a two party system firmly entrenched and no way around that.
Political eficacy in the US has been in th gutter for years. Seriously 54% voter turnout is gonna be considered high? So if 46% of the public was already sick of the system the last election and Nader pulled just what 10% of the vote maybe will he have a shot now?
Its naive to think he has a "fair shot at winning"l, even if he's the better person for the job.
The Florida Keys and Everglades
The Black Sheep Chronicles
What constitutes bad manners?
The male mystique
Debate Fan
Not so much naive as ..holding out hope. The idea that Nader "spoiled" Gore's chances of winning in '04 is complete nonsense. Funny how no Republican ever accused Pat Buchanan of stealing Bush's votes in Florida, New Mexico, Iowa, Oregon or Wisconsin..because Bush won by a hair.
The cynical attitude that many Americans have adopted is very distressing to me, but I'm not letting it stop me from trying to spread the word to as many as possible that there are other options. Many people don't even know about the other parties.
Cibby there will tell you that Canada always gives all parties a voice at election time. It's not like it's impossible to change our ways, it's just going to take a lot of work.
As a matter of principal: I vote for Nader, as I did in 2004. Were Nader not on the ticket then or now, I would abstain. If I did otherwise, I would not be able to face myself in the mirror.
Cibby: thanks! I'm going there right now.
Hunt Famous
Orble Post of the Day
Fat Cult
Techbreak
... if there's no majority, though, very little gets done. We have a strange rule in Canada that says if a bill doesn't pass, it automatically triggers an election, so minority governments try to soft shoe.
All Knowing Geek
Politics works differently in Canada because there are distinct differences in how people live from one province to another. Toronto runs completely different from Montreal which runs different from Vancouver.
Now, are issues in Texas completely different from those in Massachusetts? Last I checked, they at least speak the same language.
On Buchanan, yeah we (Meaning I am a Republican) did make a big deal about him potentially taking votes. The mass media just didn't play it nationally as much because he was fourth. Look at FLA for example. 97,000 Nader votes to 17,000 Buchanan votes. 80,000 votes swings that election (1,000 votes swing it), and I'm saying that as a Republican. So spoiled is a valid point.
My POV is if you want those votes, your candidate should've been better. But if you can't see a spoiler from just pure numbers, you're not trying to be objective.
Incidentally, check out what happened in California with Gray Davis. Essentially, the chaos that followed is what you are advocating. I'm sure Gary Coleman and Marey Caray and Larry Flint all could have brought something interesting to the table, but just because they fit the minimum requirements of politics doesn't mean they should have shared the focus with real people who wanted to make a difference.
Not saying 2 parties is the way to go. Saying its what we got. Also, even if Nader pulls 36% of the vote, he wouldn't win the majority needed in the electoral college. Which means it goes to the House, which means the majority in charge votes in their party, which means Nader has ZERO chance to win.
Not for President at least. Senator, Rep., Gov vote your heart out. President, well, Mickey Mouse has the exact same shot at being elected. Hope or no.
The Florida Keys and Everglades
The Black Sheep Chronicles
What constitutes bad manners?
The male mystique
Debate Fan
campaign interviewsdebates..ugh. More on that later.Now, Mr. Red, to address your points one by one:
-I used Canada as an example of giving all parties a voice at election time, not as a solution for our problems in gov't.
-Comparing Nader to Gary Coleman et. al is a little off the mark, don't you think? It's not like the man just thought one day "Hey, why not run? It'll be a hoot." Nader has been fighting for the consumer's rights for 40 years, and he is still doing so by running.
-The "spoiler" bit adopted by the Dems and the media is a poor excuse for a candidate who couldn't get the votes, as you said. One thing we seem to be losing sight of, though, is that the whole "spoiler" label is based upon the assumption that all of the voters who cast for Nader or Buchanan would have voted Dem or Repub otherwise. I disagree with that whole "lesser of the two evils" mentality. It's intellectual laziness. I'd pick a third party at random from the ballot and cast that way if Nader weren't running. Why?
-Nader himself entertains no delusions about being elected president. What he is and has been trying to do is break up the two party system and bring the American public's attention to the fact that it can be changed. A two party system does not work when both parties want exactly the same things in the important issues like economy and the war.
-Also, just a gentle correction; Nader is on the ballot in 45 states, can be written in on 4 more. The state of Oklahoma is the only holdout.
--The duocracy is not indestructible. Nader's runs
for the last three elections are trying to bring that point home to the public. For all of those who cry "spoiler", and "you can't beat the system", I say: Wake up!! Read your constitution! It was set up specifically so this type of monopoly (yes, monopoly. Both parties are on the same agenda) can be broken up by the voters.
A good example of this would be the third party on Women's Suffrage. Another is the third party on the issue of Slavery. Neither of the two existing parties wanted anything to do with either of those issues; it took a third party to get them pushed through.
Yes, we won't see immediate results. Yes, it will take hard work and more civic involvement on the part of Americans--but it can be changed, if not for us then for our children and our childrens' children..but action has to be taken NOW, before we lose any more of our civil rights.
It comes down to this: we can stay insulated to what's going on in gov't.-- fat, pissed off and ineffectual as we're being herded along to the slaughterhouse; or we can get off of our cynical and complacent butts and exercise a little foresight beyond where we're going for dinner tonight.
Mum's Word
Love & stuff
Mrs M