VIVA MEXICO!
:-)

POWER TO THE PEOPLE! People should not fear their government; government should fear the people.

Thanks WP, I had no idea the teachers strike started on 5-15-06. I thought it was just a side protest resulting from the election. Desperate People resort to Desperate Measures. It makes me so mad that our military is being sent down there to back this corrupt government and theres nothing we can do about it. Thanks for continuing to cover this story, I believe its very important to the American peole who gets elected in Mexico. If Calderon becomes the president our porous borders will be inundated with people trying to escape the corruption. It boggles the mind that nobody can add 2+2. If Americans could only see how these people are treated they wouldn't be so quick to send them back to that hellish existence. I pray there is no violence but I don't have much hope that it won't happen. Damn GB and his neocons cronies to HELL, which is where they all belong!

Funny how so many in the United States look down on the Mexican immigrants, when, it seems, the Mexicans are not too afraid to get out and do what it takes to beat back injustice and oppression... at least not the ones back at home. Viva Oaxaca! Viva Lopez Obrador!

"it's been rumored that a contingent of US Special Forces has been sent to help the Mexican military guard the country's oil fields in case of trouble"

Once again, in the eyes of Bushco, it's all about oil!

ITMFA!!!!!!!!

#4.......Agent99

If things really get nasty, look for an "incident" somewhere along the Mexico/US border.

Hey, MEP, good to "see" you. If things get really nasty where? And, what is it about the border itself? I don't follow you. How would a border incident bear on Mexico City, their oil fields, or the scene in Oaxaca? Are you talking about our immigration hassles or their democracy hassles? I mean, maybe these rumors of a highway are about transport of oil from A to B, and maybe the scum are guarding the oil fields against Obrador's minions ripping them from the control of private interests, but what if Obrador's people, The Mexican People, ignore the oil fields while they are taking their country back? What would a border incident have to do with it? How does that threaten the Mexican people? Or are you talking about it threatening the US? Please explain.

Thanks for reporting this story Brad. It seems our other liberal/Democrat web sites have not noticed this story either.

I second it. Viva Mexico. The money elite in that country will only take notice, and actually allow an election when it threatens there business. Bush should be happy to see democracy breaking out. Democray is a messy business - D. Rumsfeld.

If Mexico could have fair elections it would certainly keep Mexicans from coming up here. You know they don't want to leave their homes. Obrador wants a decent wage and works to attract business.So that makes him a leftist in the eyes of Bushco and MSM. Didn't Nixon want a fair minimum wage? He would be called too liberal now by Limbo and O'Reilly. Where is Pat Buchanan when you need him. Do I want a white country...or do I want to pay a housekeeper for $3.00 an hour? What to do ...what to do.

I find it strange that there is no mention in any news reports of any following for Calderon waging a counter-protest to the millions supporting Obrador. Is there such a counter-protest we are not hearing about? Are Calderon's supporters intimidated or less organized than Obrador's? Or is the popular support for Calderon even more fictional than the election re-count results suggest?

EWASTUD
That's what I said about the Bush inaugural parade. There were empty stands and the protesters out numbered the bush people by 3 to 1. It tells you, who is really the winner in my mind. We are living in dictatorship times. Even though I'm not religious. I'll pray for the people in Mexico who call for justice.

Ewastud #11

I asked that same question several weeks ago. So far I have seen nothing regarding Calderon followers. The most I have seen have been some complaints about inconveniences from the protests. Nothing about Calderon supporters.

There may be a total of 500 actual Calderon supporters in Mexico, if he's lucky. Any other votes he actually got were coerced through fear, and now that they can see the whole country coming to demand Lopez Obrador, they sure aren't standing up for Calderon. The people may be poor, but they are not stupid. It's only when you're not so poor you can afford to be so stupid (our wingnuts' big excuse).

EWASTUD - (C) # 11

Calderon,.. his handlers and American Fascist political consultants are recommending he act entirely Presidential. There was no election fraud,.. the election was not stolen,.. when Trife selects him as the valid President,.. Calderon will assume his rightful seat of power,.. no fuss,.. no fight,.. and no commotion. If anybody gets sweaty and hot under the collar,.. it will be Lopez Obrador,.. the Mexican and American oligarchy and fascists want Obrador to project a most UN-PRESIDENTIAL image once Calderon is fraudulently anointed El-Presidentio. They will then label Obrador a loose cannon,.. a mad-man,... or a junta leader who seeks to deny the smooth transition of a "democratically elected" government.

=====================

That was a nice political power play to keep Vicente Fox off of the podium to give his State of the Country speech. The legislative politicians kidnapped the podium and would not surrender it to Fox. The demonstrators in the streets vowed to keep Vicente Fox from the microphone,.. if they had to take action to accomplish that the policia and military would have clashed with the street protesters. Nice to see that that bloodbath was diplomatically avoided. Another day,.. another political battle favorably accomplished,.. and no wasted band-aids.

Mexico had ONE-PARTY RULE for seventy years.

I've had a nasty day of listening to leftists slaver about the possibility that blood in the streets will overturn the government of Mexico. And then, WHO KNOWS what Shangrila of freedom and magnaminity might spread?

Instead, without some deft crisis management, several thousand Mexicans are likely to be dead, and nothing of great value will be accomplished --- except perhaps an invasion of Mexico by the Bushies, which would come just in time to change the subject from their crimes.

Obragon's parallel government idea is VERY dangerous.

The history of Mexico didn't just start a month ago. The leftist idea of a sudden radical overthrow followed by paradise generally does not exist, especially in the technological weapon era. Obregon should restrict his rhetoric toward getting the ballots counted, though I applaud the moves so far.

Leftists, like rightists, have to keep relearning the same lessions over and over. Here in America, for the last seven years we haven't been able to get leftists to help with the vote-fraud. Democracy Now! has barely reported it. Leftists have regularly told me that they are waiting for the whole system to fall. And that view is so facile it is truly horrible that people can fool themselves with the one-sided study of history to that point.

Seventy-one years of one-party rule in Mexico. This popular insurrection could EASILY produce a second three score and ten, and also further destabilize the situation in the United States. Do leftists care? Hell no --- they are readying the marshmallows.

Paul, you might try getting the name right, for a number of reasons, and you might consider that what Obrador is doing is no more dangerous than what Calderon will be doing. If Obrador fighting to get the real election results is a bad thing, the next long stretch of one party rule has ALREADY started... if it ever ENDED. And, yes, people die, people get killed fighting for their rights and a better world. IS THAT WORSE THAN STARVING TO DEATH OR BEING GUNNED DOWN IN THE STREET FOR DRILL BY FASCISTS?

"I jumped up and began shouting with joy this morning when I opened the paper and saw the headline: "Tumult in Mexico: Fox's speech blocked"
Joy for two reasons - #1 That it happened - by the legislators no less! #2 That it made the newspaper! Well actually 3 reasons - #3 It made the front page!

When are the frigin' Democrats going to wake up and create such a challenge!"

(My comments in an email to a dear friend this morning )

Blubear2 #18

To answer your question re: "the frigin' Democrats"

They won't wake up! In fact they aren't asleep, they are awake... Its just that the Dem's are as corrupt & money/power-grubbing as the Republicans. Why else would the Dems allow the constitution to be violated, voter rights to be squashed, failed "independant" investigation into 9/11...?

The current 2-party "system" we've allowed our democracy to become is more of a single party than many would like to admit.

Looks like Mexico might show us what REAL democratic change is about.

Viva Mexico, Viva Obrador, Viva Democracy. Power to the people!

It looks to me like Democracy is breaking out all over the world and the previous rulers better get the drift. Too bad those protesters that we first saw in Fahrenheit 9-11 egging Bush's motercade didn't just throw some blocks in front of damn thing and watch him sit there trapped!

I usually pay no attention whatsoever to Brad Pitt, but I saw him talking about New Orleans and how they think they can build houses for people that will require little or no money for utilities. I don't know all the particulars, but hopefully gas is a thing of the past!

We don't need no stinking corporations that think they can have personhood and have Hastert swear in whoever they want!

GOOD RIDDANCE!

nonaubiznez #19

I'm in full agreement with you, my question was more rhetorical than expectation.

"COMMENT #17 [Permalink]
... Agent99 said on 9/2/2006 @ 12:14 am PT...

"Paul, ...you might consider that what Obrador is doing is no more dangerous than what Calderon will be doing."

And that matters HOW? Calderon is representing the actual fiscal power of the country --- which is not going to just give itself up to the left, I've got news for you.

"If Obrador fighting to get the real election results"

I never criticized that effort. Indeed, I said I applauded it so far. It is the leftist "chaos leads to paradise" theory that I am protesting.

"is a bad thing, the next long stretch of one party rule has ALREADY started… if it ever ENDED."

Yes, that's a clearer seeing, though you don't seem to understand THOSE FACTS.

"And, yes, people die, people get killed fighting for their rights and a better world."

I see. "People" die. How enlightening.

"IS THAT WORSE THAN STARVING TO DEATH OR BEING GUNNED DOWN IN THE STREET FOR DRILL BY FASCISTS?"

No, it's exactly the same thing, by whichever means. The idea, however, that it is good leadership to take a direct run at the HEAVILY-ARMED, US-BACKED, STATUS QUO is an alternative is so misguided you have to believe you were just born on a snowflake.

It's very dangerous --- it's NOT a path to paradise --- and I'd just like to see some recognition of that in the "hot for revolution" sillies who think people dying GUARANTEES an improvement of conditions. It does not. Mexico, as Venezuela and many other places, is BARELY free. The trick is to increase the freedoms, and political power --- not wipe out four or five thousand supporters in a misguided (badly led) FANTASY.

"Its just that the Dem's are as corrupt & money/power-grubbing as the Republicans."

There is no evidence of either contention. Al Gore gave up the election contest when the Supremes betrayed their oaths. Is that "power-grubbing"? No, it may have been tragically weak, but it was not the demand for power at any cost. Nor can Dem behavior over the last six years since be described as power-grubbing. Regrettably, quite the contrary.

As for 'as corrupt' --- that is CLEARLY nonsense.

"Why else would the Dems allow the constitution to be violated, voter rights to be squashed, failed "independant" investigation into 9/11…?"

Why else? How about the desire not to give the pretext for a full collapse of our government? This has been a violent coup. How best to handle that?

Leftists like yourself believe in AVENTINE SECESSION. Read into it, see how it works out.

"The current 2-party "system" we've allowed our democracy to become is more of a single party than many would like to admit."

Our democracy has been a 2-party system since the early years of the 1820s. If you think that's 'we,' you've been alive longer than I.

"Looks like Mexico might show us what REAL democratic change is about."

Looks like Mexico is about to show you how much it is like China.

This is what we are fighting all over the world!
http://www.rense.com/general73/diss.htm

Paul

People dying, revolution, does not guarantee improvement. It is always what you do with it that makes the difference... like the American Revolution set next to, say, the Russian Revolution. IT IS CERTAIN THAT IMPROVEMENT WILL NOT COME WITHOUT PEOPLE DOING WHATEVER IT TAKES TO STOP THE OPPRESSION. That would be what they are doing in Mexico right now.

Agent99, 'whatever it takes' is not a strategy --- it's a description of desperation.

My main point is that leftists have:

• A bias for hopeless causes, uninformed tactics, and leaving out the facts.

• A refusal to work for democracy if it means compromise with power (as it ALWAYS does).

• An embrace of entirely unproven theories of social change, and a great tendency to falsely generalize 'victories' in one area to all other areas.

Case in point is the fairly constant holding up of Chile as a place where the populism worked. Unmentioned is the SEVENTEEN YEARS during which the populism did not work.

Mexico is a highly corrupt nation. Treading carefully is the only possible strategy. IF leftists actually seized government (for instance), an invasion by US forces is GUARANTEED.

My primary complaint on this topic is that leftists don't understand that simple fact --- prefering to believe that putting their heads (and a lot of campesinos) into the heads of those tigers is the way freedom is won.

Freedom in Mexico requires consolidating the views of the population. The rhetoric of leftists instead argues running away from consolidation in a vague effort at revolution. And the same here in the US. By demonizing the Dems, as above, leftists hope for a collapse of the system. Since that's not coming, all they succeed in doing is strengthening the junta in power, and losing the consolidation of activists with the people in government --- something hard to establish, and hard to maintain.

"Power to the People" will not produce freedom by itself, because the People have ALWAYS had to negotiate with POWER to get democracy and redress of wrongs.

Instead of calling for 'revoution,' we really need more calls for justice under our laws. As long as Obrador does that, he has all of my support. Talking about 'parallel government' and facing off with the Mexican military are NOT positive forward steps.

"This is what we are fighting all over the world!
http://www.rense.com\"

Rense is a promoter of the idea of a vast Zionist conspiracy. He has promoted the ideas of Holocaust deniers.

As long as the flying saucers have their peace rays on full, all will be well in the end.

If you get your ideas from Rense, you are living in quite the Baroque dream. Mythology and politics are strange bedfellows. While I myself believe in a few conspiracy theories, it AMAZES me to meet people who believe, apparently, in ALL of them, even when they contradict each other!

Down with superstition. Hooray for the Enlightenment.

Did the People of the United States have to negotiate with King George to get democracy and redress of wrongs?

Do you suggest that masses continuing to starve to death and trying to migrate to wherever they can under-bid someone else for work enough to feed their families is something that needs must continue while the democratically elected true head of state negotiates with people who can only keep their power by continuing to keep the populace in such straits?

At a certain point, Paul, it just boils down to appeasement. And, at a certain point, there is no guarantee that the military will continue to help the greedy thugs stay in power. If leftists taking power in Mexico guarantees an invasion by the United States, when they are the popular choice of the Mexican people, how many Americans do you suppose will go fight that fight? And, do you think they can win? Would they do any better than they have in Iraq? DO you support a government in the United States that continues to oppress and kill anyone who gets in the way of corporate profits? They are showing, clearly, beyond question, that such is their intent and they will not be budged from it, even by law, by the CONSTITUTION. How do you negotiate with that, Paul?

You don't. You fight it, or it kills you.

This is important news. Thank you Brad. Will Katie talk about it? Seems with millions of Mexican immigrants on our soil, this would be a story of interest, nay?
Bless the truthseekers.

"Did the People of the United States have to negotiate with King George to get democracy and redress of wrongs?"

No, they had to negotiate with the French government, to survive the Revolutionary War at all. Without Ben Franklin in France, hobnobbing with the French aristocracy, the American Revolution would have FAILED.

"Do you suggest that masses continuing to starve to death..."

I suggest nothing about the current deplorable conditions in most of the nations in this hemisphere. I am talking about desperation, and how desperation is NOT a useful tactic.

"At a certain point, Paul, it just boils down to appeasement."

This point is constantly raised by leftists. Do you know what the Aventine Secession is? There is no other option than to negotiate with power. And even when it appears to be appeasement, that negotiation is the only game in town.

"And, at a certain point, there is no guarantee that the military will continue to help the greedy thugs stay in power."

And on this guess, you wish to invest how many innocent lives?

"If leftists taking power in Mexico guarantees an invasion by the United States, when they are the popular choice of the Mexican people, how many Americans do you suppose will go fight that fight?"

Not many would be needed. The last time the US invaded Mexico was a hundred years ago. But if you will regard the constantly-referenced military actions in the hemisphere list that leftists keep, you will see that the US government will certainly not fail to block any such event. Furthermore, once the November elections are stolen, it is highly likely that we will see an invasion of Bolivia, and quite possibly Venezuela as well as Cuba.

Will there be a draft? YES THERE WILL. And then the blocking of the borders --- supposedly to immigrants --- will come into clearer focus.

"And, do you think they can win? Would they do any better than they have in Iraq? "

I am newly amazed when leftists CAN'T SEEM TO NOTICE THAT THE BUSH POLICY IN IRAQ HAS BEEN INCREDIBLY SUCCESSFUL. You lot continue to pretend that they have been defeated, while they have killed 300,000 people, destroyed as much international law as they could, established (and armed) four major airbases and a 600-acre Citadel with 16 foot walls.

In a few weeks, Israel will be attacking Syria and then Iran. Those airbases will come in handy, no? Former-Iraq will be three refugee groups, Lebanon is already destroyed, Yemen and Qatar (a freebie) will both fall in an afternoon, and so on. That is the ORIGINAL PNAC plan, and it is stunningly 'successful' so far.

"DO you support a government in the United States that continues to oppress and kill anyone who gets in the way of corporate profits?"

I oppose this illegal rightwing government entirely. As for 'corporate profits,' they are a constant, and they are not going away.

"How do you negotiate with that, Paul? don't. You fight it, or it kills you."

Careful how you 'fight it.' If you want to throw down with flintlocks, I'm sure the Pentagon will LOVE to turn it's new microwave weapons on you and your pals. Kind of hard to hold onto a red-hot rifle, especially when your insides are cooking.

We need to fight for JUSTICE on our laws. We need our democracy back. We do NOT need leftists, with no loyalty to the American system of government, trying to get a lot of people killed in their desperation to convert the world from its present course.

I share the anguish, and the (legal) struggle. I simply do not support the tactics --- especially when they are based in pipedreams of revolution.

Paul, my point keeps whizzing by you, and you keep reaching for ever more baroque ways to state your case. My point is that the death toll of a revolution cannot be worse than the death toll of the status quo, and, while it might NOT gain its aims, there is no hope to gain its aims if the people are not at least prepared for revolution if the government does not cede them their due. The leftist government in Venezuela seems to be doing VERY well for the people. The leftist government in Cuba has given medicine, food, education and homes to people who were starving under the old regime. It would long have been an even better place to live if the United States had not been sitting on its ability to thrive so hard. Sure, lots of leftists are boobs, Paul, but that does not mean that they all are, or that some of them are not far better for the majority of people.

I'm perfectly aware that the fuckers behind the Iraq invasion have won precisely what they sought, but THEY ARE KILLING HUNDREDS OF THOUSANDS OF PEOPLE AND A LOT OF THEM OUR OWN, CREATING MORE ENMITY AND A FUTURE FULL OF MORE DEATH. There cannot be a thing to be lost by the people of Mexico by resisting them with Lopez Obrador. They will be beaten down and starved to death the same as ever if they let our Calderon take the helm.

Desperation isn't an embarrassment if you mean to be quit of it, and have the will to be quit of it, Paul.

It's as if you want to find some intellectually-refined excuse for not bucking the murderous fucks out there. There isn't one.

"My point is that the death toll of a revolution cannot be worse than the death toll of the status quo,"

Oh? Why don't you check out how well the Chinese Revolution worked out. Or Cambodia. Or the revolution called the Civil War of the States. Massive, useless bloodshed.

"there is no hope to gain its aims if the people are not at least prepared for revolution if the government does not cede them their due."

That is a claim without evidence.

"The leftist government in Venezuela seems to be doing VERY well for the people."

How well do you know S. American history? The gov't of Vz is doing well for its people IN DIRECT REFLECTION OF THE OIL BOOM THAT BUSHCO CAUSED. Plenty of cash for social programs. However, Vz is still destroying pampas and Amazon rainforest at an awesome clip.

"The leftist government in Cuba has given medicine, food, education and homes to people who were starving under the old regime."

Mexico is not Cuba. And Cuba is not Mexico (no oil).

"Sure, lots of leftists are boobs, Paul, but that does not mean that they all are, or that some of them are not far better for the majority of people."

I never called leftists boobs, but they do seem to have a regular set of delusions. And, comparison to 'the majority' is moot. When Dem Now! refused to cover Kerry's first debate EXPOSURE of the airbases scheme in Iraq, and repudiation of that policy, it wasn't because Goodman is a boob. It's because of her belief that both parties are the same. That belief helped Bush.

"I'm perfectly aware that the fuckers behind the Iraq invasion have won precisely what they sought,"

Well, that's good. Because I've spoken with a long line of leftists during protest who have crowed about how the 'resistance' has handed the US their arses. I had leftists telling me Israel LOST the Lebanese bombing campaign! HILARIOUS. Lebanon is a ruin, a 50 year set-back. But Israel 'lost'? I really find it strange that leftists need to cling to such delusions.

"There cannot be a thing to be lost by the people of Mexico by resisting them with Lopez Obrador."

Another argument without data to support it. They could, for instance, lose ALL control over their government. You do realize that Mexico has a Legislature? How about if, as with Pinochet, the Legislature is shut down in response to leftist violence?

"They will be beaten down and starved to death the same as ever if they let our Calderon take the helm."

I doubt if the result would be so unlike what conditions there have been FOREVER.

"It's as if you want to find some intellectually-refined excuse for not bucking the murderous fucks out there. There isn't one."

Yes, there is. It's NOT GETTING A LOT OF INNOCENT PEOPLE KILLED WITHOUT EFFECTING ANY PERMANENT CHANGE.

I love Mexico, but I am aware of how corrupt it is at every level. Pushing too far, with vague ideas of how it can't be worse is DESPERATION. And, yeah, that's no tactic. Especially when there is a legistlature, a Constitution, a legal system, and a will to make progressive gains. Grab for the brass ring, and maybe go into a bloodbath. That's no solution.

Martin Luther once said that societies are like a drunk trying to mount his donkey. He gets up one side, and falls down the other. It might be better to sober up a bit first, before giving the RIGHTISTS everything they need to hold a BIG REPRESSION episode you can all sing about.

Paul #23
"There is no evidence of either contention. Al Gore gave up the election contest when the Supremes betrayed their oaths".... "Is that "power-grubbing"? No, it may have been tragically weak, but it was not the demand for power at any cost. Nor can Dem behavior over the last six years since be described as power-grubbing. Regrettably, quite the contrary."

..........................................................
"Cowards die many times before their deaths. The valiant never taste of death but once."
~William Shakespeare~
..........................................................

If defending our constitution (against treachery) would cause a "full collapse of our government" then sobeit! Anything so corrupt does not merit continuance.

Why promote a 'safe' life within a fascist state? You're only safe until the 'SS' come to your door.

REAL democracy sometimes entails bloodshed & revolution! Yes, the stakes ARE high... risk of imprisonment, pain, torture & even death.

Take a moment now & consider that these ARE the EXACT risks young Americans are taking (in Iraq & Afghanistan)... and for what? For who's freedom, liberty & democracy? AND WHO sent them there?!

Not corrupt? My ass! Two corrupt sons of the same father!

Your appeals are to fear and comfort. Is your life so good... so comfortable? Are you naive? Or are you preaching disinformation?

re: Gore:

Gore was a coward. He failed (in his duty) to defend the constitution. He does not deserve to be
President. Furthermoer, Gore's/the Dem's silence & failure to defend the voting rights of black Americans (during hearings into the election) said more than any words could. Who specifically benefited (i.e. power)? Are the Dem's still in the political picture? Well then.

Gore was in a similar pickle to Julius Caesar... The knifes were drawn, and both his friends & enemies were moving in for the kill. The difference between Gore & Julius Caesar is that Gore knew what was coming - he capitulated & they made him their bitch!

Okay, Paul, I'm an idiot and you are a very pragmatic intellectual heavyweight. What do I know? Nothing. I never made it past third grade. I have no means to tell right from wrong. I don't belong discussing such geopolitical intricacies with the likes of you. You really know best. Lopez Obrador should just fade away. The Mexican people should go back to quietly dying in their cardboard boxes and slipping over the border to get work instead of trying to make a better country for themselves. The people with money and power will forever be necessary for the masses, no matter what the toll. There is no better way to govern ourselves because recorded history says there isn't. I give up. Kindly forgive me for interrupting your sense of self-satisfaction on this fine holiday weekend. Proceed.

Right On 99....Paul in La, You know I don't care what you think about what I post here. I've seen you here before stirring up trouble with others on the threads. You need to go to the new post on this story by Michael Collins. Read all the comments maybe you'll learn something. But I highly doubt it.

... nonaubiznez said

"If defending our constitution (against treachery) would cause a "full collapse of our government" then sobeit! Anything so corrupt does not merit continuance."

That's wonderful leftist purity.

"REAL democracy sometimes entails bloodshed & revolution!"

Let's see your list of examples.

"Take a moment now & consider that these ARE the EXACT risks young Americans are taking (in Iraq & Afghanistan)"

The soldiers in those theaters are not taking those risks for God, Country, or Freedom. Study after study, and you can ask any vet you like, demonstrates that soldiers fight FOR THEIR SQUAD.

It is humorous to see a leftist weep for the apple pie sacrifices of our soldiers, though.

"Not corrupt? My ass! Two corrupt sons of the same father!"

Who knows what you are referring to.

"Your appeals are to fear and comfort. Is your life so good… so comfortable? Are you naive? Or are you preaching disinformation?"

No, I simply pointed out that your claim that Dems are as corrupt and as power-grubbing as Rapepublicans is DEMONSTRABLY false. You have produced no evidence to readdress your claim, and it is still demonstratedly false.

"Gore was a coward. He failed (in his duty) to defend the constitution."

He fulfilled his oath, by following the Hayes-Tilden Bill to the letter. We do have a Judicial branch, btw. It's not Gore's fault that the SCOTUS violated THEIR oaths.

"He does not deserve to be President."

He would make an EXCELLENT president. And he is probably the most qualified candidate in the country: 8 years in the House, 8 years in the Senate, 8 years in the White House. He is also a big part of the reason why you are able to defame him publically on this blog.

"Furthermoer, Gore's/the Dem's silence & failure to defend the voting rights of black Americans"

It was not his unique job to defend those rights. Apparently you are unaware of the Senate's history.

"Who specifically benefited (i.e. power)? Are the Dem's still in the political picture? Well then."

A meaningless comment. You have failed utterly to support your claim of equal corruption, and as for power-grubbing, the most obvious example, which you yourself accept, is clearly not a case of power-grubbing.

Paul (in LA?)

A true intellectual doesn’t resort to catch-all labels i.e. "left", "right" etc. Labels are only used by those who cannot successfully argue their position/for purposes of obfuscation.

Regarding the Dems' & Rep's being equally corrupt:

I see that this is difficult for you to conceptualize. So, for your benefit (and those persons equally conceptually challenged) I give you... WWF Wrestling:

There are always bad guys & good guys. They take turns beating one another to entertain the audience; the rolls are understood & scripted. In the end, they all collect their pay from the same purse.

Now, I appreciate that this is an advanced concept... But I believe that if you read it enough times - even the difficult words... you'll get it.

nonaubiznez said "a true intellectual doesn’t resort to catch-all labels i.e. "left", "right" etc. Labels are only used by those who cannot successfully argue their position/for purposes of obfuscation."

NONSENSE. A label is valid by its generaliztion; an apple is a fruit.

In the case of 'leftism,' I use that term with a specific definition, confirmed through a great many interactions and statements by leftists.

I find that 'leftists' do not support conventional politics in America. They hope for third party solutions, rarely putting anyone into power. And leftists often foster purist ideas that lead to Aventine Secessions and failed opportunities. Leftists are quite capable of shooting themselves in the foot for principle.

Your comparison of Dems and Rapepublicans is facile. Your statement that they contest for show is no doubt true under many circumstances, but there are a great many where that is not true. But since leftists don't put people into power, they can retain their idea of purity.

Such purity doesn't exist in politics. AND NEVER HAS. So if you don't believe in politics, then you only have revolution to argue. But then, you put some new government into power, and the dirt from the REAL POWERS THAT BE just flows back in.

Rather than professional wrestling, your real image is a detergent ad. There is nothing but perfectly clean that you will accept. Even so, the obvious differences in "power-grubbing" and "corruption" (your phrases) between Dems and Rs is SALIENT, and OBVIOUS.

You have not made your case.

Paul in LA: Once again, when Martin Luther King was in Birmingham jail, there was no end of liberals telling him he was moving to fast, that what he was doing was dangerous.

You are in the same position.

Anyone who is looking forward to a confrontation between the PRD and the Mexican state is a fool, whatever their politics, because the Mexican state has long and bloody experience in repression. But Lopez Obrador has consistently used non-violent tactics, against which repression looks foolish. Indeed, in an irony doubtless lost on you, HE IS USING EXACTLY THE SAME TACTICS USED BY PAN IN 1988.

This is not lost on the Mexican people.

_________________

Ewastud, although the PAN is held together-- like the Republican Party here-- through a combination of pork, patronage, loony religion, and racism, it is an authentic party with a popular base of support. Indeed, it accomplished a major good deed by displacing the wildly corrupt PRI from power.

And then just took over their machine.

Mexico City is Lopez Obrador's home turf, where he was an immensely popular mayor. The police chief has consistently refused to challenge the demonstrators. Outside of Mexico City, it's a different story. The southern states generally lean toward Lopez Obrador's PRD, while the northern states lean toward PAN.

To Bradblogians in general: the one thing Paul in LA has posted that is accurate is not to rely on Rense for anything.

But, frankly, anyone who thinks that "leftists" (whatever that means) are the, or even *a* major problem is debating a strawman, not the actual human beings writing posts here.

The major problem is that systems calling themselves democracies are behaving like authoritarian societies with bogus democratic window dressing.

As a consequence of being authoritarian, they are making faulty decisions that cause long-term damage to the society as a whole. One of those faulty decisions is the decision to maintain populations in a state of needless fear as a means of controlling them.

But there is nothing more frightening than allowing oneself to become a person who cowers before thugs.

A slave.

Charles said "But, frankly, anyone who thinks that "leftists" (whatever that means)"

I have defined my use of the term in one of these Mexico threads. It is a specific term, and you surely are not arguing that there are generalizations to be made, are you? After all, you make a major generalization in your comment:

"systems calling themselves democracies are behaving like authoritarian societies with bogus democratic window dressing."

The US has had an illegal rightwing coup. The democracy is damaged by that, but that doesn't make the system a false democracy. It's a nation being run by criminals, whom we are fighting, and whose vote-fraud were are rooting out.

"But there is nothing more frightening than allowing oneself to become a person who cowers before thugs."

Cowering is not the same as getting a lot of people killed because someone thinks that Obrador is Bush. Mexico had a stolen election --- that doesn't mean that the entire political system is collapsed. What exactly do you think produced 70 years of the PRI, if not fraud?

I meant "surely are not arguing that there are NOT generalizations to be made"

I meant: "Cowering is not the same as getting a lot of people killed because someone thinks that Calderon is Bush."