Reply #268: okay, with as little enmity as i can.

[tomp]

i don't know how many greens have been elected to congress.

i don't know how many "progressives" are in congress.

but here's what i know: the system is the problem. even a cursory look at campaign financing and the voting irregularities of recent years should be enough to convince an objective observer that the system is thoroughly corrupt. so, no, i do not subscribe to an electoral strategy in the same way that you apparently do. i subscribe to educating people on the most fundamental issues and letting the chips fall where they may.

as for 9/11, i draw nothing like the conclusions you do from the fallout of that tragic event in my home city. you think al gore would not have invaded afghanistan and/or iraq? well, you have more faith in him than i do, but perhaps we can review the the history of the democratic party and war. not a pretty picture, i assure you. in addition, you speak of 9/11 as if we know anything about it. it does not surprise me that you are unaware of the many hundreds of key questions that remain unanswered regarding the event, that both dems and repubs have steadfastly refused to explore. the only thing that is clear about 9/11 is that its deepest cause is u.s. imperialism, that system which you are trying to work within. also, hypocritically, you fail to hold obama's feet to the fire on the issue of (among other things) pursuing the crimes of bush/cheney, inc, which in my considered opinion would lead right back to 9/11. no, you would rather go on with democratic party business as usual.

the fact that carter was not allowed to be re-elected (and if you think that election was honest i have a bridge to sell you) shows the effectiveness of your political strategy. the fact is that he and whatever progressive aura you ascribe to him were summarily ushered from office by the puppeteers of the system. his purportedly progressive energy policies could not be allowed by the system. take any issue you want and an objective examination will show that the system allows, at best, ever, a bone or a crumb in the right direction to diffuse the movement toward real change. i can only see you as a cheerleader for that system.

it is very easy, and lazy and/or disingenuous, to dismiss my position as" ideological bullshit". to suggest that because i hold a different viewpoint on the possible way forward, that i am somehow uncaring about and even responsible for these millions of deaths you speak of is not just personally offensive, but the icing on the cake of the proof that you are squarely behind the system you so claim to be so radical about. if it weren't so dangerous it would be utterly laughable, at least to any "radical", that you don't think democratic presidents are authorizing and/or working within cointelpro-like secret policies. remember obama voting for retroactive immunity on the telecom's collusion in illegal surveillance? no, i didn't think you did.

unless you are ready to make concessions to my arguments, i won't be responding further, as you have thus far proved immune to the logic of reality. all i ever hope for is that someone with an open mind will have been reading exchange like ours.