I'MMA LET YOU FINISH
The message really is quite simple, isn't it?
Kucinich has the wonderful advantage of not having to worry about winning; thus, he can be completely honest, candid, and blunt when desirable, and remain true to his (deeply admirable) convictions.
I stood next to Kucinich at a protest in Seattle a year or so ago. He was just in the crowd with some pals, officially present but not surrounded by guards or otherwise innaccessible. He is also a good speaker. I like the guy a lot, I only wish he was electable.
Why not run it? Are we supposed to wait until the body count is something respectable........like 58,000?
He and the ad creator are addressing the issue that Bush and the NeoCons are avoiding at all costs.
War=Death.
Dead Americans are bad for business and re-elections
Good for Mr. Kucinich. At least we know he has balls.
Saw this on buzzflash a week or so ago, didn't realize it was from the Kucinich camp. Very powerful propaganda in the best sense of the word, I sent it on to lots of friends. But will American mass media even think of allowing it? Never. After all, this is that mythic land of free speech W thinks so highly of.
Wow. Impressive ad. Really gets under your skin. My heart wants to vote for Kucinich but my mind tells me to stick with Dean.....at this point. But there's probably no way, regardless, he'll be elected. Americans are too superficial and he looks like an elf.
DAMN GOOD AD.
Sends chills. We need people like Kucinich to assault people's consciences.
I hope it's being run somewhere.
I like Kucinich. It would be great if he could take over as the leading liberal voice in America, as opposed to, say, Nader or Kennedy. Kucinich has much higher credibility. I look for good things from him after the election.
Fatalities
American soldiers 305
British soldiers 20
Coalition soldiers 32
---
357 Since May 2
American 444
British 53
Coalition 32
---
529 Since March 20
Wounded
American soldiers ~2516 Since March 20
Note: American forces have fallen to 130,000
British forces have risen to 12,000
Coalition forces have risen to 12,000
Why does Kucinich hate America? Doesn't he realize that avenging Poppy Bush and making Halliburton et al. even more filthy rich is worth more than those misguided idiots who put on the uniform? What a simp.
Important and fearfully sad.
I don't know if anyone here has been watching the FLA Democratic convention coverage on C-span. I clapped for Edwards, cheered when Dean spoke, but I cried when Kucinich spoke. He is a wonderful speaker, and has the ideals and passion that we can now only wish this country could elect.
This is from BushFlash.com, with Kucinich's logo slapped on the end.
Anyone know if they paid Eric Blumrich for the flash ad, or just ripped it off? I couldn't find anything on Kucinich's or Eric's site about this ad (except for Eric's original version, which I saw a couple of weeks ago).
test
Shame Dean and the rest don't have ads with that level of production value. That was completely cutting edge, it will blow anything the republicans come up with out of the water in terms of impact.
Oh, never mind, I just saw Eric's update on BushFlash about the ad.
I saw this animation a couple weeks ago. It's done by the same guy that did "Idiot Son of an Asshole". I send that url to many people, and was bumming around in Blumrich's homepage and saw this. Needless to say, I thought it was powerful then, and is powerful now.
Kucinich has big cojones for using this.
Shame Dean and the rest don't have ads with that level of production value. That was completely cutting edge, it will blow anything the republicans come up with out of the water in terms of impact.
I watched the ad again. If they played that in mainstream media, it would cause heart-attacks all over this country.
A few different blogs I've visted have counters on them that show the costs of the war in money and it's, like, a $1000 a second.
Actually, a Dean supporter made a pretty good video that a lot of us show while tabling, etc.
http://www.deanpix.com/
then click on video on lower right
Wow! This is powerful.
Wow. Unfortunately, I doubt it will ever play. Even if you could find a network exec with the balls to run it, it's 2 full minutes. That's a very, very pricey ad.
The problem with actually using this ad is that it's way too long. I'm not sure how long it is exactly, but it's at least 2 minutes.
That would cost a fortune to run anywhere in the country. A typical 30 second ad buy in Iowa is about $200,000 a week. This would be at least 4 times as expensive.
Check out my weblog about the 2004 campaign ads -- we'll be reviewing this and some of Eric's other stuff soon.
http://www.bushout.tv
...it's too intellectual.
The USofA outspent Iraq about 387 to 1 in military dollars. Whatever happened to "pick on somebody your own size?"
--ventura county, ca
America never starts wars against states with any real defense. Iraq, Serbia, Guatemala, Nicaragua, Angola...
I want to see that ad on t.v., and if the networks won't run it, I want to be part of the mob that sacks and burns their corporate headquarters.
Ok ... maybe not.
But I do want to see it on t.v. 
kucinich rocks!
Why is this little man disturbing my beautiful mind?
Hell of an ad
I also like the one that MoveOn is running about what we could be doing with the 87 billion. If they showed the two of them back to back it sure would make people actually think.
RC
That may be the most "in your face" and powerful political ad I've ever seen. I hope the networks pick it up and run it so people go to the web and view it. Because it will never be run on TV.
Thank you Kucinich, and Atrios for linking to this ad. I know Kucinich doesn't have a chance in hell of winning, but he's driven the debate left, and now breaking new ground with this ad.
That was awesome! The ad just leaves you speechless. Only Kucinich has the balls to run an ad like that. I wish for all the world that he could be the Democratic candidate, but you just know he's going to get the Jerry Brown treatment. People even within his party would portray him as a leftist flake; he's too good a man to have that happen to him. Perhaps in the next life we'll see the likes of a Wellstone/Kucinich ticket, but sadly it ain't gonna happen in AmeriKKKa circa 2004.
read(y) needs fixin, 'Trios
It won't be on TV because the corporations listed on that ad would file suit very quickly.
Eric Blumrich actually did the animation a few weeks ago and he has an explanation on his website www.bushflash.com as to why it has a Kucinich logo at the end--they asked him if they could use it and he said yes. It wasn't done particularly for Kucinich, but kudos to his campaign for seeing the potential in it. I've been sort of keeping up with the page because the dialogue for his entry in the Moveon.org commercial contest "Gone in 30 seconds" was largely written by my brilliant girlfriend. That's available for viewing on the website as well. Go check it out, if I may be so pimpalicious as to suggest it.
By the way, Moveon should buy this ad from the Kucinich camp and run it anyway. This is too important a message to be ignored by the wingnut-dominated media. Hell, somebody should secretly buy time on Faux and CNN and sneak the ad on to the airwaves. Maybe, just maybe, a message like this would wake people up (one can only hope)
Shame Dean and the rest don't have ads with that level of production value. That was completely cutting edge, it will blow anything the republicans come up with out of the water in terms of impact.
They'll never show it in mainstream media. Heck, I bet in a month or two, mainstream media wont even report on the daily deaths of troops anymore.
This ad is the most beautiful, most perfect politically relevant animation in a long time. Every American should be shown this ad. However, I think it is a major mistake to end with any specific endsorsement. It should just be an expression of disgust with the thieving murderer in chief. And as Kucinich would be much more valuable in the House, he should let whoever gets the nomination (i.e., Dean), use it.
This ad makes me regret more than ever that we really won't be able to effectively vote for Kucinich. Honest bastard included mention of Iraqi casualties!
Even if it doesn't win much for Kucinich each time it runs, it pummles Bush on behalf of all Dems. each time out.
Reading the previous posts, the same theme resounds..... " Kucinich is fantastic/gutsy/passionate/true democrat/etc. , but it's just too bad THAT HE CAN NEVER WIN."
Who says America isn't ready for someone who will yank the goddam wheel to the left after this hard-right bunch of lunatics?
I swear Karl Rove has an army of moles squirting this MEME into every friggin progressive blog. Kucinich has the potential to be a powerful force, and he's just getting started.
And yes, the ad at two minutes would be an expensive buy. But running it just a few times at the right time slot would do a lot.
IMHO.
Even if it doesn't win much for Kucinich each time it runs, it pummles Bush on behalf of all Dems. each time out.
Actually ABH, it conveys the [accurate] idea that certain Democrats are shrill, exploitative, and paranoid. "They died for Halliburton" doesn't play all that well with most of the country, Murdoch-brainwashed zombie fuckheads that we are. Sorry!
"Who says America isn't ready for someone who will yank the goddam wheel to the left after this hard-right bunch of lunatics?"
I read someplace from someone who was angry that America hadn't actually elected a liberal president since Nixon. Afterall, it was Nixon who created the EPA and some other liberal initiatives.
I like this too. But I don't think it's particularly useful from a political standpoint. The biggest mistake people make in politics is thinking that because something is compelling to them, it will be compelling to people in general.
This isn't a persuasive ad. It fires up people who are already anti-Bush, but will do nothing for people on the fence.
Also, if a candidate were to run it, people could make the argument (and I'm not sure I'd disagree) that they are using the deaths of American soldiers for political gain. Not a line I'm eager to see crossed (by our side, of course; I expect it from theirs).
"Actually ABH, it conveys the [accurate] idea that certain Democrats are shrill, exploitative, and paranoid."
It would at least give me, as a lefty, some satisfaction if the ad aired as a hard punch in America's fat gut if they ran it over and over.
Excellent Ad, I'd even approve of Dean giving Dennis some money to run it, a lot. Not going to happen of course, but, I think it's a hell of a good ad anyway.
you don't have to show it on tv...the ad can be run over and over again on the internet on individual websites...the internet is the new super medium. when are we all going to finally realize that. it's like putting the printing press into the hands of millions upon milllions of people. we don't have to rely on some media mogul giving us time or space...you have your own means. thanks atrios...just keep running that ad and ask others to send it to their friends...see how fast it catches on.
I didn't find the ad shrill or exploitive. It's not like the democrats would be running ads saying, "Don't let the troops deaths have been in vain! Vote the republicans out!" I think the ad was based on the facts, produced in a way to stir emotions. That's what ads are supposed to do.
Even if you could find a network exec with the balls to run it, it's 2 full minutes.
It could easily be tightened up and brought down to a minute - even 30 seconds.
Is this the same guy who runs "Take Back the Media?" Dean should hire him (or both).
Speaking of Move On, they just closed entries for their "Bush in 30 Seconds" ad contest - should be quite a few of those hitting the internet once the judging is complete.
As far as the Dems not running such a hard-hitting ad, I'd direct your attention to Gilliard's post on "The Rise of the 527's."
Gentlemen, start your Flash!
That ad has impact on the scale of the famous anti-Goldwater one with the little girl plucking petals off of a daisy morphing into the countdown to a nuclear blast.
That ad was yanked off of the air, if I recall correctly. We all know about it because of the news coverage of the controversy. If there was enough money for one showing of that Kucinich ad in primetime, the endless free replays on news clips about the controversy would more that justify the cost.
dave,
No, Blumrich is not the same guy(s) as TBTM.
I just think DK is running for the Senate seat held by Volnovich (sp?).
If Kucinich run the ad people from Karl Rove to Glenn Reynolds would spin it to death. The ad would do more harm than good.
Let's face it, Kucinich put it on his web site because he is desperate. So the rants from the right about the ad being for political gain wouldn't be entirely false.
That said, let's get Bush out of the White House.
But Nemo, if the purpose of political advertisement is to convince voters on the margin to vote for Kucinich or any other anti-war Democrat, it's a pretty ineffective ad, and hence a bad one. People inclined to believe "they died for Halliburton" are probably not "on the fence." To all others, it's question-begging propaganda.
Talking of campaign ads . . .
Gun lobby seeks broadcast outlet, media exemption from campaign finance rules
Hoping to spend as much as it wants on next year's elections, the National Rifle Association is looking to buy a television or radio station and declare that it should be treated as a news organization, exempt from spending limits in the campaign finance law . . .
Propaganda works.
This ad could be a catalyst that crystallizes some people's discomfort about a war that seems pointless into hardened opinion.
I think the ad could be more effective on main street than some upthread give it credit for. First, with the use of the color red, and the violence of the images and movement, it appeals to the same pathos that Bush appeals to. Which means it might work for many of the same people that Bush works for.
Further, main street and city street disagree about military culture, a lot. But they do not disagree about corrupt corporations. By emphasizing that angle of the killing, you're emphasizing something that a lot of people can agree on.
Finally, this gets out stats that just aren't being covered by news sources that most people watch. I know that for people who will not consider the number of dead as a way to judge the war, including the numbers would have no effect. But for those who do care about numbers and individual names, actually learning the numbers would have a pretty powerful effect.
Incertus - your girlfriend is most brilliant! I can't wait to see the "Bush in 30 Seconds" animations at moveon.org when they come out.
Too bad Eric doesn't have the cash to attend the Flash convention he was invited to. If I were rich (instead of unemployed) I would love to pay his airfare to SF!
Thanks, stranger...
I like the first two thirds of the add. I don't think it is effective to tie it into Bechtal et al. It needs to be simple.
Bush sends people to die needlessly
Bush doesn't ackonowledge war dead.
Bush is hearless, etc.
I dislike Kucinich both because I disagree with much of what he says, and even when I agree with him I don't think he's very good at packaging his message to appeal to a wider audience.
Hillary loving DINO/LINO.
Should have guessed it before now.
Whole herd of DINO's here.
Once you start on the primaries you can't stop till next year. Guess you let the cat out of the bag eh?
Run the ad for three days and you would stir up some much controversy that people would hear about it, and/or go watch on the web-site. You wouldn't necesarily have to run it for a long period of time.
However, if you're going to print soldiers names in an ad, you should have permission from their families.
Craaaaap
Eric is too generous with his work. On his site, www.bushflash.com, he says that he gave the Kucinich people the video for free when they asked for it, and that he considers all of his work public domain. Dean, whom Eric supports, could have had the ad for free if he had asked for it. But Eric has also said on his site that he was going off antidepressants because he can't afford them, and from pulhleeze! above I learn that he can't afford to attend a flash video convention, either . . . Eric does brilliant work, he ought to get paid for it. And yes, Dean should hire Eric and put him to work.
Anonymous | Email | Homepage | 12.06.03 - 8:07 pm | #
Bah, blah, blah. DINO, LINO, AKB.
Blah, blah, blah.
Get lost, clown. You bore me.
IMHO examples?
there are two questions for people who want to elect decent human beings like Kucinich: desperation, outrage over the disconnect between Bush II and his subjects leading to an "insult candidate" almost out of spite, and "sneaking in," carefully adding more just views, like Truman adding civil rights. We saw slipping Schroeder surge by slamming Bush, but neoliberal GS (think the Clinus) is hardly an example of electing a real progressive on anger towards a real reactionary. The example I'm thinking of is dishonest neolib alleged embezzler Chirac, elected in angry response to LePen; "better a crook than a fascist." And it may be that we are not living in a good enough world to hope for, "better a decent human being than a fascist."
kei & yuri voted for nader thinking like you, and while we can't blame nader when Al Gore went out of his way to "bob dole" (or, not campaign in any sense of the word. As in getting on a debate stage with dyslexic world-ignorant Georgie and agreeing with everything), we will necessarily look with hostility at any Zelly "liberal" endorsing a hard-left crapshoot after the nomination. Luckily this Bush is so fucking inept, arrogant and unpopular that we doubt we will be alone in this. Please don't try to say Rove is doing it, when we have good records of what Rove does and this doesn't fit.
We have to get a mod to repair the crimes of this fascist. Getting a prog to repair the crimes of neoliberalism can fucking wait.
AKB doesn't like certain politicians. Blah, blah, blah.
Go away, kid. Bother someone else.
I'll tell you something about doing flash work for politicians - if you are not part of an advertising agency that is approved by the candidate's campaign staff, they will not pay you.
What's worse, they seem to believe that if they don't have to pay for something, it is somehow inferior.
I cannot tell you how much flash work I offered to the DNC last year - and
I made it clear up front that I didn't want or need to be paid for it. I just wanted to contribute work that would carry the message that I know was felt by most Democrats I know.
It was always the same - the rank and file loved it, they showed it to their bosses, their bosses turned it down for being 'too edgy.' And then they hired an agency and probably paid them a lot of money for that piece of crap with Bush pushing the woman in a wheelchair down the stairs.
Remember the 'flash contest' that the DNC ran from their web site last year? They never announced a winner. And if I don't miss my guess, it was probably because they considered every entry (straight from the people who would know what the correct message to send to Dems would be, because they were Dems) 'too edgy' - or valueless because some goddam consultant wasn't telling them to pay a few grand for it.
stranger,
Which is why you need to find the 527's and talk to them. The parties will not touch that ad, but the 527's will.
And always ask for money, always. The only way to deal with pols. Ask for cash.
I think the 527's are going to be far more influential with their ads than the campaigns. Those are the people I'd work with.
hmmm -- it's a powerful ad. but atrios' is correct, it would turn many folks off, i'm afraid.
and nah, they won't run it on the air, for one, because it's too long and would cost a fortune!
That truly sucks, stranger.
As an artist I've experienced and witnessed similar things. Sometimes you sell more by raising the price of the work. Sadly, it's not an issue of the quality of the work, but rather the firm conviction on the part of the purchasers that the price of a thing is truly an objective measure of its value.
That's nonsense, of course, but we're not dealing with people who feel safe thinking for themselves without some "concrete" marketplace valuation to back up their conclusions.
I'm utterly dismayed to hear that Eric is struggling so hard and that you were treated dismissively. It's a snapshot of what's wrong with the Dem leadership -- they're too timid, conservative and more interested in not being wrong than in being right.
Very powerful, painfully true, no one will run it, and if they did, too few would pay attention.
5 days for this Flash animation? Give me a break! Good concept - awful execution imo.
Another fellow flasher/usability author and blogger will be doing the flash ads for Clark (there's lots of talk in the flash community about it right now)...I wonder if Dean is hiring. I may not be a PHP guru but I know how to flash 
a
I really liked the work.
Steve,
Just read your post on 527s. Point taken.
stranger
You made some valid points. I have never done any Flash work for politicians but I have come across the same probs with other companies (i see the same trend now in the pharmaceutical industry). I worked as part of an in-house online creative team for a UK-based broadcaster and the marketing folks always wanted to go to an external agency. The more money an outside agency charged (for simple 2mins flash promos), the more confident our marketing execs felt that things were under control.
The best part was when they'd still come back to us, after paying all that money, asking to optimize the movie or debug it. What a waste!
a
Never offer to donate. Always ask for cash up front. Maybe more cash than you want and/or think they can afford - you can always negotiate downward. (On the other hand, you might get it!)
The point is, if it's offered for free, people think there's something wrong with it, even if it's perfect. If it costs a lot, they think it has worth, even if it's crap.
An addendum - I did get paid for acouple of Senate campaigns that I did work for. The price was fair, and they were happy with the work.
It might have sounded t
like I was bitching about getting paid/not getting paid, but that didn't bother me. When I asked to be paid by the campaigns, they paid me, no problem.
My point was more that by going with agencies, the DNC was getting an end product that was less powerful, because the mindset at most agencies is not as confrontational or hard-hitting as we will need to be in the coming campaign.
The RNC and their related groups will be looking to eviscerate the Dem nominee. We need to go for their jugular every bit as hard as they will come at ours. Nothing less will work.
"Actually ABH, it conveys the [accurate] idea that certain Democrats are shrill, exploitative, and paranoid. "They died for Halliburton" doesn't play all that well with most of the country..."
I don't know if anyone remembers the time when the conservatives in the UK had a print ad with Tony Blair with red 'devil' eyes. They thought it was clever (and yep it was Saatchi a reputable agency that came up with it), their voters loved it too, but it backfired big time!!
They lost the 1997 election and the public outcry over the ad contributed to the party's split from its long-time ad agency. They came across as shrill and desperate. The thing is getting personal can be very tricky especially when you are not preaching to the converted.
a
Correct me if I'm wrong; according to my math 1.99 deaths per day works out to 762.35 deaths over the course of the next year. How does Dennis get 2,400 (or 50 over 5 days it took to make his ad)?
Blumrich has a "donate" button on his site (Bushflash, under "Support"). Those of us who feel he's getting a raw deal have it in our power to give him a better one. He asks for as little as $1 apiece. Consider it an investment in more powerful anti-Bush pieces.
Man, this one's much better than the one Kucinich is running!
And well worth a couple of bucks...
Those who think that next year's election has to be stage-managed to succeed are apparently not cognizant of the wave of revulsion heading toward Bxco. People who haven't thought about politics in 30 years are back in the fight, and there are millions of people who are willing to help counter the Bx money.
Dennis Kucinich doesn't own the war, or the protest. Why does he keep acting like it all revolves around him? One of Dean's positives is a freedom from this aggrandizement that K expresses over and over.
As a protester, as a war and racism protester, I'd say that it is important not to fall into the Leftist trap of clinging to the facts as if they will set us free. The truth sets people free; the truth is not generally the facts. The truth that all people have human rights is more important than the facts about corporations stealing our democracy. A great many people know the invasion is a dreadful mistake. Handing them an anti-corporate line doesn't increase that sense of Error.
The What-I-Want-to-Know video is a much more important sort of ad, and it shows why Dean is going to win both the primaries and the election: he talks to Americans. He doesn't yell down from the heights.
J, without any significant analysis on my part, I would say that the deaths have not been linear, that is to say the deaths have been increasing, and if they increase at the rate they have been, per month, then I would suspect you get to Kucinich numbers in the ad,,,
That is off the cuff, speculation.
Intersting, I just showed the add to someone who doesn't regularly watch TBTM productions like this, and she quietly said the same, similar thing mentioned up thread, that the add could cause siezures in those viewing,,, she said it so naturally, like everyone might expect a great many folks to have the same reaction...
Wtf? Where does this come from, and why was that thought the farthest thing from my mind?
Just to clarify, Kucinich and his people had nothing to do with the content of the ad, so all math questions should be directed to Bushflash.com...
dave, I see that is from buzzflash, whos ad is that? It is good... Real good...
That ad is over the top. I wouldn't want to see my family member's name used like that.
RF,
I've gotten the same reaction from some people to some of my flash stuf - too busy, too much information, too jumpy, too this or that.
But that was fine with me, because in the early TBTM flashes I was actually going for a bit of overload.
Small point: Blumrich = not TBTM, although we all do very similar work.
Show it
Show It
Show it
The best ad since Barry Commoner broke the silence and said that he was tired of the political bull shit, he really said bull shit on the radio in 1980. Probably no one would notice today.
If he could win I'd be a volunteer in his campaign but he can't.
The ad was powerful except for the part saying all those people died for the companies. That was over the top. I don't think the ad is going to sway anybody-- heck, I am sympathetic to the idea, and overall the ad kind of turned me off.
Repackaged, I think it could be a powerful anti-Bush indictment, but on the other hand, I think pretty much everybody's mind is already made up on the war. Either you think it was disgusting and a waste of life, or you think it was a bad thing to do but it had to be done no matter the cost of life. I don't think the ad is going to sell anybody on anything they aren't already sold.
Intersting, I just showed the add to someone who doesn't regularly watch TBTM productions like this, and she quietly said the same, similar thing mentioned up thread, that the add could cause siezures in those viewing,,, she said it so naturally, like everyone might expect a great many folks to have the same reaction... -- RF
RF -- it's fairly common knowlege that strobe lights or flickering colour changes can trigger seizures in suceptible individuals. This fact was highlighted by a mass episode in Japan among children watching a particular cartoon. More info here: http://www.sciencedaily.com/
rele...90601080722.htm
That said this ad doesn't strike me as being that kind of trigger. The colours don't change that rapidly, and I didn't feel like the names were really strobing, visually. I'm no expert, though.
"I wouldn't want to see my family member's name used like that."
______________
I suppose we could just wait for the next "wall" to be built on the mall in DC- in about 30 years.
Here are FACES to go with the names.
And here are a few of their
"http://glassfrequency.blogspot.com/
2003_07_01_glassfrequency_archive.html#10585997319
2694170">STORIES.
THE MILITARY TRIBUTE (updated daily)
Well it was Kucinich who said on the news that Bush was invading Iraq for oil. Richard Perle call Kucinich a liar and Richard Cohen cheered Richard Perle for having done so.
Richard Cohen has been on my shit list ever since, I hate that columnist.
This war was about oil and Baker is brought in to rein in control-not that Baker will any luck without more troops are money to do so.
It's one think that eluded Bush and his cronies as well it should. I with Kucinich on this one.
Ralph Nader also so said Bush was going to war for oil. It was oil and it was nothing else as Bush seeked to smear France as about oil only when it was Bush who was about oil only.
This is why it so important for Iraqis to keep bombing those damn pipelines. Bush is seeking to steal their Iraqi oil and it is only just that remain the one item he and followers of blood oil never get it.
Fuck Bush
This hiding of coffins is really pretty awful thing for Bush to do and NOT very Christian application to do at all. Bush hides the dead so his poll numbers don't fall and no respect and doesn't take responsiblity for he is doing.
Bush just pretends his a Christian like all the right-wing redneck idoits think they see in him but Bush is really quite the unethical guy by every standard of modern Christianity.
Was pretty surprised to see the company on there that I work for - we are a non-profit and are doing som esurvey work.
Also, if a candidate were to run it, people could make the argument (and I'm not sure I'd disagree) that they are using the deaths of American soldiers for political gain. Not a line I'm eager to see crossed (by our side, of course; I expect it from theirs).
Ah yes, of course. Show people the truth about the debacle in Iraq and it's true cost in human life and right away the argument becomes "You're exploiting their deaths for political gain!!". Nobody seems to question the Bush regime's cynical efforts to hide these brave men's deaths from the American people (can't negatively effect the Chimp's poll numbers, you know!). It's only "exploitive" when someone on the Left exposes the war in Iraq for the useless waste of life that it is. I say show the ad; Link to it on every blog, everywhere; email it to friends, relatives, your favorite wingnut know nothing. In short, MAKE this message gain traction.
I think I like this video "Remind Us" better:
http://www.praesentia.us/archive...es/
remindus.swf
should help get him a senate seat to take wellstone's place though. ala fight bob lafollette.
OT,
Sherman Austin, 20 yr old webmaster of www.raisethefist.com was sentenced in Sep to 1 yr in prison under the Patriot Act for stuff re explosives on sites he hosts. Here's an account.
http://www.freesherman.tk/
Did Atrios have a discussion on this?
Thanks
Malcolm, I think Counterpunch had quite a long article and interview with him.
Unilateral military action by the United States against Iraq is unjustified, unwarranted, and illegal. -- Dennis Kucinich
Uh Dennis, besides using the memories of fallen soldiers for your partisan political desires, you just outed yourself as a say anything hack. One day its unilateral, the next its a coalition of fallen men and women to wave around as a personal bloody shirt. Its not only your physical stature that is lacking...
I see that is from buzzflash, whos ad is that? It is good... Real good...
Same guy that did the Kucinich ad... both are at Bushflash.com.
The music's good. Very good. TBTM did an ad a while back using the Cranberries. Not nearly as good.
Thanks soulfrieda,
I had listed a link above to the Counterpunch article. I just wondered whether I had missed a discussion about it on this site.
Thanks
Maybe this is more effective as an on the net Flash. Watching it in the middle of the night sent chills down the spine (Be sure to have the sound on!).
If run, keep the buy limited ... overplay would vastly diminish its effectiveness.
The first half of the ad reads just like an argument for why we should kill all those fuckers! They killed my mom!, or my dad!, or my sister! WE'LL KILL THEM ALL!
THIS WOULD(in no way) BE AN EASILY FACSIMILED ADVERTISMENT with A COMPLETLY OPPOSITE MEANING. That would not confuse the voting public at all! So forget about that!!
Otherwise its fantabulous.
This is one of the annoying leftie sites? Really? The majority of comments here bewail the fact that you can't endorse a candidate that you obviously admire and respect because not enough people would want to be led by someone they admire and respect. You have a one party system; please consider voting for an actual human being.
And since when did pointing out that wars are exploitive become an exploitive act in itself?
Great ad, but I have to question including Research Triangle Institute as one of Bush's "rich friends" benefitting from the war.
RTI is a nonprofit.
It cannot contribute. It's members, if a list i saw in Newsweek is to be believed, have contributed less than $5000 to ANY political candidate since 1998.
I think maybe they shouldbe taken out of that ad.
hey
havn't had time to read all 112 posts above me, so pardon if this is repetitious...
how about we donate specifically to get that ad on the air? can we do that? i'd give a hundred bucks to see that run...
The majority of comments here bewail the fact that you can't endorse a candidate that you obviously admire and respect because not enough people would want to be led by someone they admire and respect.
Maybe the truth is closer to "many people wouldn't necessarily admire and respect someone that WE like and respect" ... WE being the leftier side of lefty politics.
Uh Dennis, besides using the memories of fallen soldiers for your partisan political desires, you just outed yourself as a say anything hack. One day its unilateral, the next its a coalition of fallen men and women to wave around as a personal bloody shirt.
Bush would fuck that "coalition" that you're so proud of right quick if he thought it would get him and his buds a few dollars more.
It IS unilateral, assmonkey ... check out the relative numbers of soldiers in Iraq right now: approx 150,000 US vs. 10-20,000 any other country.
It is a good ad because it clearly makes its point and it is extremely innovative. Effective? I do not think so. It is visually annoying to me. If I watched it more than once I would just turn it off like a noisey car ad. There is no compelling reason to what it more than once.
And then there is the question of it being true. Has anyone presented any credible evidence that the reason for the Iraqi war was to enrich friends of the administration (and of the Democrats since many of these companies donated to both parties)? I don't know of any evidence. To say all those people died solely to enrich Halliburton, etc. is more than farfetched, it is crazy. It is slandering those companies, their officers, stockholders, and employees in my view. They all vote.
Well, the co. I work for, also a US based non-profit, is doing subcontract work in Iraq but is not mentioned -- I was relieved, to me it's a badge of shame.
Non-profits like RTI and mine (which shall remain nameless) are affiliated with the for-profits. RTI has major, historical links with Bechtel. For ex., do a search on most research projects RTI does; it works with Bechtel or for it. So even they, themselves, are non-profit they are right in line for the AID gravy train in IRaq and should be (expletive deleted) ashamed of themselves.
The Left *should* back a candidate like Kucinich or Sharpton, even though he has no chance of winning.
Why? If the Democrats want us to give up the Ralph Naders in 2004 to get rid of Bush, that's good, but we need to exert some control over the process. By picking one of Kucinich or Sharpton (and I know there's baggage either way, to say the least, but there's baggage with all of them) and riding him all the way to the convention, the DNC is forced to deal with the Left as a force and make platform, policy and Cabinet concessions.
Oh and I agree that it is refreshing to see there is at least one Democrat who is unabashedly liberal. If they want us Nader voters back it would help if they at least acted kind of like they care about a few of our issues. I find the condescension of the mainstream Dem party towards us left people to be mind-bogglingly rude. (Vote for us or else you are helping Bush, but no, we won't do any of the things you care about, we just are going to continue to court the damned so-called "moderates." To heck with you; but vote for us anyhow. Or else you're a (insert nasty "nader voter" name here.)) To hell with them too. If they want my vote they have to earn it.
To say all those people died solely to enrich Halliburton, etc. is more than farfetched, it is crazy. It is slandering those companies, their officers, stockholders, and employees in my view. They all vote.
They all vote republican ... their CEOs, anyway.
If that ad ever hit the air, Haliburton would sue, demand injunction and have it granted by some hack judge Bush Daddy put in.
It's that good.
No 'Cronyism' in Iraq
by Steven Kelman
November 6, 2003
Reprinted from Washington Post
There has been a series of allegations and innuendos recently to the effect that government contracts for work in Iraq and Afghanistan are being awarded in an atmosphere redolent with the "stench of political favoritism and cronyism," to use the description in a report put out by the Center for Public Integrity on campaign contributions by companies doing work in those two countries.
One would be hard-pressed to discover anyone with a working knowledge of how federal contracts are awarded -- whether a career civil servant working on procurement or an independent academic expert -- who doesn't regard these allegations as being somewhere between highly improbable and utterly absurd.
The premise of the accusations is completely contrary to the way government contracting works, both in theory and in practice. Most contract award decisions are made by career civil servants, with no involvement by political appointees or elected officials. In some agencies, the "source selection official" (final decision-maker) on large contracts may be a political appointee, but such decisions are preceded by such a torrent of evaluation and other backup material prepared by career civil servants that it would be difficult to change a decision from the one indicated by the career employees' evaluation.
Having served as a senior procurement policymaker in the Clinton administration, I found these charges (for which no direct evidence has been provided) implausible. To assure myself I wasn't being naive, I asked two colleagues, each with 25 years-plus experience as career civil servants in contracting (and both now out of government), whether they ever ran into situations where a political appointee tried to get work awarded to a political supporter or crony. "Never did any senior official put pressure on me to give a contract to a particular firm," answered one. The other said: "This did happen to me once in the early '70s. The net effect, as could be expected, was that this 'friend' lost any chance of winning fair and square. In other words, the system recoiled and prevented this firm from even being considered." Certainly government sometimes makes poor contracting decisions, but they're generally because of sloppiness or other human failings, not political interference.
Many people are also under the impression that contractors take the government to the cleaners. In fact, government keeps a watchful eye on contractor profits -- and government work has low profit margins compared with the commercial work the same companies perform. Look at the annual reports of information technology companies with extensive government and nongovernment business, such as EDS Corp. or Computer Sciences Corp. You will see that margins for their government customers are regularly below those for commercial ones. As for the much-maligned Halliburton, a few days ago the company disclosed, as part of its third-quarter earnings report, operating income from its Iraq contracts of $34 million on revenue of $900 million -- a return on sales of 3.7 percent, hardly the stuff of plunder.
It is legitimate to ask why these contractors gave money to political campaigns if not to influence contract awards. First, of course, companies have interests in numerous political battles whose outcomes are determined by elected officials, battles involving tax, trade and regulatory and economic policy -- and having nothing to do with contract awards. Even if General Electric (the largest contributor on the Center for Public Integrity's list) had no government contracts -- and in fact, government work is only a small fraction of GE's business -- it would have ample reason to influence congressional or presidential decisions.
Second, though campaign contributions have no effect on decisions about who gets a contract, decisions about whether to appropriate money to one project as opposed to another are made by elected officials and influenced by political appointees, and these can affect the prospects of companies that already hold contracts or are well-positioned to win them, in areas that the appropriations fund. So contractors working for the U.S. Education Department's direct-loan program for college students indeed lobby against the program's being eliminated, and contractors working on the Joint Strike Fighter lobby to seek more funds for that plane.
The whiff of scandal manufactured around contracting for Iraq obviously has been part of the political battle against the administration's policies there (by the way, I count myself as rather unsympathetic to these policies). But this political campaign has created extensive collateral damage. It undermines public trust in public institutions, for reasons that have no basis in fact. It insults the career civil servants who run our procurement system.
Perhaps most tragically, it could cause mismanagement of the procurement system. Over the past decade we have tried to make procurement more oriented toward delivering mission results for agencies and taxpayers, rather than focusing on compliance with detailed bureaucratic process requirements. The charges of Iraq cronyism encourage the system to revert to wasting time, energy and people on redundant, unnecessary rules to document the nonexistence of a nonproblem.
If Iraqi contracting fails, it will be because of poorly structured contracts or lack of good contract management -- not because of cronyism in the awarding process. By taking the attention of the procurement system away from necessary attention to the structuring and management of contracts, the current exercise in barking up the wrong tree threatens the wise expenditure of taxpayer dollars the critics state they seek to promote.
Steven Kelman is a professor of public management at Harvard University. He served from 1993 to 1997 as administrator of the Office of Federal Procurement Policy.
If that ad ever hit the air, Haliburton would sue, demand injunction and have it granted by some hack judge Bush Daddy put in. It's that good.
Maybe Haliburton would have a case...at least to the former administrator of the Office of Federal Procurement Policy...under Clinton
One would be hard-pressed to discover anyone with a working knowledge of how federal contracts are awarded -- whether a career civil servant working on procurement or an independent academic expert -- who doesn't regard these allegations as being somewhere between highly improbable and utterly absurd.
Possible reasons to invade Iraq:
a) WMDs -- no WMDs exist in Iraq; claims of evidence now ALL revealed to be lies and/or exaggerations (which means lie)
b) al Qaeda -- no link between Iraq and aQ terrorism; definately no link of Saddam to 9/11, US public's ignorance nothwithstanding
c) War on terra -- increase in aQ recruitment, increase in international terror activities since Iraq invaded
d) for the Iraqis -- 10,000 Iraqi civilian deaths in 10 months; no evidence of planning to set up Iraqi self-gov
e) US security -- see a, b, and c; Americans don't feel any safer from terrorists post-Iraq
f) Oil -- first priority = oil fields secured; more guards placed around oil wells than most cities in Iraq
g) Sweetheart no-bid contracts -- several Iraqi contractors denied rebuilding contracts despite offering lower bids
highly improbable and utterly absurd
I remember that 1 year ago anyone who didn't think Saddam could nuke us within 45 minutes was considered "utterly absurd."
I could keep going, but I'll stop for now with this thought:
BUSHCO HAS NOT BEEN RIGHT ON IRAQ YET ... NOT ON ONE SINGLE GOD-DAMN ISSUE.
Whereas I (and others of similar literacy), not to put too fine a point on it, haven't yet been wrong. So trust us ... we know the score you're to blind/dumb/naive to see.
Meanwhile, back on Planet Earth:
Holy shit! It's a reasonable Democrat not screaming incoherent ramblings!!! Evan Bayh is a respectable Democrat, willing to put partisan differences aside and also willing to speak critically but RATIONALLY of Bush.
http://www.weeklystandard.com/Co...3ueeaa.asp?
pg=2
"Ralph Nader also so said Bush was going to war for oil. It was oil and it was nothing else as Bush seeked to smear France as about oil only when it was Bush who was about oil only.
This is why it so important for Iraqis to keep bombing those damn pipelines. Bush is seeking to steal their Iraqi oil and it is only just that remain the one item he and followers of blood oil never get it."
God, you really need to be hit straight in the fucking head with a Clue-bat numerous times. Way to keep supporting the troops...
Oh and FOAD (ie Fuck Off And Die) while you're at it Cheryl.
Btw, nice to see Cheryl is openly rooting for the Iraqi resistance movement and no one else here bothers to say anything.
Way to keep supporting the troops...
...quoth that which advocated putting the troops into the firing zone in the first place.
It costs what 1 million per 30 seconds for a super bowl ad. So 2 minutes will cost 4 million. Triple that --> 12 million. No executive could refuse that price.
moveon.org get working. There has to be 12 million people out there willing to donate 1 dollar each to the cause.
GODDAMN IT!!!!
What the f%$k is wrong with so many of you?
"Ooooh, we shouldn't run something like this because it will turn too many people off, . . . . . waaaanh, waaaanh, waaaanh.
"Or worse, they might accuse us of exploiting the deaths of soldiers for political gain."
Blah, blah, blah, blah.
So many of you are a bunch of screaming codependents . . . . just like the leaders of the DNC.
Sometimes, you have to hit people over the head and punch them in the face with the truth, AND LET THE CHIPS FALL WHERE THEY MAY.
Got it?
As for anonymous . . . . listen you little fascist pr&$k. Do us all a favor: Go back to sucking your hero Bush's member.
On top of it, you're a coward. You never post your e-mail address, but instead act like the little snarky shit you are with your factually incorrect and inaccurate comments.
I'll tell you what. You can contact me directly, because I DO post my e-mail. In private, you can let me know where you live and you and I can arrange to meet in a dark ally. What do you think? You up to the challenge?
As for Kucinich . . . yes, I LOVE his positions on the issues. However, he lost me as soon as he declared his candidacy. Basically, the guy is weak. He doesn't come off tough. For example, anyone who lets Chris Matthews walk all over him, when Chris Matthews is clearly in the wrong, doesn't deserve to win an election.
Finally, isn't anybody OUTRAGED by the fact that the mainstream media would never run it? Instead, we sit around and sadly and resignedly bemoan this fact.
What has become of us?
"Has anyone presented any credible evidence that the reason for the Iraqi war was to enrich friends of the administration (and of the Democrats since many of these companies donated to both parties)? I don't know of any evidence. To say all those people died solely to enrich Halliburton, etc. is more than farfetched, it is crazy."
What did they die for?
What companies are getting no-bid contracts?
Who was vice cheney the CEO of before the war?
If it smells like a fish...
Sorry atrios, some of your posters make little to no sense to me - I'd guess those people HAVE voted re-thug in the past and are simply backdrifters.
there is more to ad getting this ad on tv (even once) than the presidential election... its not just about kucinich - or even bush.... it IS about ending the war.
where can i donate?
The MoveOn.org ad about what else America could buy with $87 billion is much more effective, sorry to say. Americans as a whole simply do not care about these soldiers. Thats the truth. There was never any good reason to send them over there in the first place and if they were people you cared about, you'd be against it from the get go.
What's wrong with the Kucinich platorm, Atrios? He and Sharpton are the only two liberals in the race. The others are all DLC hacks; the kind that have destroyed the Democratic Party, btw. I will hold my nose and vote for whoever emerges. ABB, after all. It's nice to fantasize about someone like Kucinich becoming president, though.
Hey, didn't liberal Democrats have a huge majority in congress not too long ago?
Hmmm, must've been all those centrist policies or perhaps because they were so photogenic...
"What's wrong with the Kucinich platorm, Atrios? He and Sharpton are the only two liberals in the race."
Dino's and Lino's rule here. There are a few REAL Liberals and traditional Democrats posting. Unfortunately they are attacked by the Clintonite corporate kisasses.
"The others are all DLC hacks; the kind that have destroyed the Democratic Party, btw."
I don't think Dean is a DLC guy. The DLC fears and attacks Dean.
"I will hold my nose and vote for whoever emerges. ABB, after all. "
Nope, none of this Any Democrat But Bush. priorties are Kucinich/Sharpton Dean. Clarck is the DLC Clinton guy, not sure if I trust him. Definitely don't trust the rest.
Tod Westlake
"If it smells like a fish..."
And is crusty it must be PIE!
Thom Yorke
I wish people would stop acting like Dennis is the fount of Lefty purity. He's anti-choice. He flipped and claims now to suuport Roe v. Wade, but his voting record is solidly anti-choice. He is on record as saying that life begins at conception.
Kucinich was also one of the Dems who joined the Repubs in voting for unlimited impeachment hearings on Clinton.
People feel free to mythologize Kucinich as some sort of Lefty saint only because he's got no chance in hell of winning the nomination.
Sharpton is similar. I won't even go into his history other than to say -- great speaker, seriously murky ethics and business history which would all be all over the news if he were a serious candidate.
Damn typos.
support not suuport.
Well Peanut,
Regardless, I'm sure when we have a democrat nominee beginning next month, we will all get behind him. I would bet on that. I hope to be maxed-out with contributions for Dean by October.
You're right, of course, Peanut. I admit I'm pretty gullible, damn it. But when push comes to shove, i.e., voting time, I'm not! I'll vote ABB.
But Kucinich or not, I hope the ad plays somewhere, and gets wide distribution on the internet.
I'll tell you what. You can contact me directly, because I DO post my e-mail. In private, you can let me know where you live and you and I can arrange to meet in a dark ally. What do you think? You up to the challenge?
Meet you in a dark alley? Sounds like you have to engage in violence to further your political goals. Isn't that the trademark of a fascist? Any relationship to Benito?
Or am I just misinterpreting your intent? If so, I'm not Gay -- not that there is anything wrong with that. I do not make it a habit of meeting up with anonymous men in dark alleys. That's why I don't leave my e-mail address in liberal forums. I understand that is common place for men to meet up in these forums. However, please do us all a favor and practice safe sex during your dark alley "meetups". I would hate to have the help that your comments provide the Republicans to go away.
"Dennis Kucinich doesn't own the war, or the protest. Why does he keep acting like it all revolves around him? One of Dean's positives is a freedom from this aggrandizement that K expresses over and over."
Not an American myself, but obviously interested. Kuchnich's "Prayer for America" speech was delivered back in 2002, first got him noticed. He was way ahead of the curve on the war, out of principle. He's still the only one of the candidates with a seat in Congress to have voted against the war, so please don't act like he's some Johnny-come-lately, like some other candidates I could mention.
Now maybe you can go back to calling kuchnich ugly, or something. Not a real man, like Angry Howard.
Regardless, I'm sure when we have a democrat nominee beginning next month, we will all get behind him. I would bet on that. -- Nemo
Amen to this, Nemo. And like you Streaker, I am solidly ABB. Even Lieberman -- and that's a vote that would really cause me some pain.
I just get fed up with people seeming to suggest that Kucinich is who we should all be voting for if we weren't selling out our leftie ideals. I find him a hard sell for what I consider to be legit reasons.
I love the ad, though. I'd like to see it everywhere, but maybe MTV would be an ideal venue. Then the news channels would pick up on the controversey and give it some free advertising.
Blogger dead. Can't post. Go check out this delightful article..
http://
www.theaustralian.news.co...55E2703,00.html
Those who try to do the undoable must also think the unthinkable. US strategists in Iraq are contemplating what they have always denied, the search for a "strong man with a moustache" to stop the present rot. If the result is not democracy, so be it.
If the result is the dismemberment of Iraq, so be it. Iraq has become a mess. There is only one priority: to "get out with dignity".
This strategy is now being rammed down the throat of the US administrator in Baghdad, Paul Bremer, by George W. Bush's new "realist", Deputy National Security Adviser Bob Blackwill. He answers to National Security Adviser Condoleezza Rice, not US Defence Secretary Donald Rumsfeld, and is the new boss of Iraq.
Wow. Wonder if that report is legit? To laugh or to cry, an ongoing dilemma for so long as BushCo remains office.
...remains in office.
Damn. The Republicans ate my grammer.
How about this tiny, interactiveBush/Cheney 1984 ad?
Too egghead?
the Bush/Cheney link isn't working
Quick! look!! Over there!!!
The Moon~!
Kucinich has a platform I can almost completely support. Not much to dislike. I will switch from Green to Dem just to vote for him and then sadly vote for whoever can beat Bush in the big one even if their platform is mushy, vapid and elctable.
Good for Kucinich. At at time when Dean's far too carefully parsed press release in the wake of MA's high court ruling has dampened my enthusiasm for him (ok, so he's the only one of the Dem frontrunners not to make "I don't support gay marriage" the lead, but he certainly didn't go out on any limb to say it was a good court ruling either), I'm glad to see Kucinich still up and swinging.
Geez - -people, people! These elections coming up - they're called PRIMARIES! The idea is to vote for who you really want - who you trust and support. There has to be a winner - of course - once all is said and done - to stand behind that person. I just don't get all the hand-wringing and "my heart is for so-and-so, but my mind says such-and-such is the 'electable one'..." Good grief, this is why there are primaries, to sort this all out.
sorry. try this:
http://home.earthlink.net/~benjo...enjoya/posters/
and nice name, preznit
We must stop this communist from even speaking his vile trash. We're at war. God Bless America -- my homeland, not yours, liberals.
Philly - how do you propose to "stop this communist?"
Can you say it out loud?
i thought networks couldn't refuse an ad by a person running for president as long as they personally stand by the ad.
flatulus -
Thanks for that. That one should be running on TV. It's goofy enough to hold people's attention, and you can dance to it!
Every time I read those hateful posts from the war mongers, it confirms in my mind that we'll have civil war before we have total American imperialism. C'est la guerre.
I must say I find it mind-boggling that it is not considered exploiting the troops to send them somewhere to die for no good reason, but it is considered exploiting the troops to point out that they are dying, for no good reason.
Anonymous' long exercise in copyright infringement, by reposting an entire article, is just an overlong Appeal to Authority. A claim made by a professor is no more necessarily true than any other. Note that part of his argument is: we shouldn't criticize the system, because even if it's true, it might make people lose confidence in the system. (!) Now what sort of argument is that for the truth or untruth of the proposition?
The collapse of Enron, the scandals surrounding Worldcom/MCI and so many other systems, prove that it is false that "government keeps a watchful eye on contractor profits". There are long, compiled reports from various non-profit oversight groups on both the left and the right that show that accountability is seldom investigated and even more rarely enforced. Add that to the admission by government and companies both that normal procedural rules were violated in awarding of Iraq contacts. In short, the article makes grotesque errors of fact that are trivial to recruit. It's hard to take it seriously at all. And this is what Anonymous thinks is a killer refutation?
Le sigh... "trivial to refute", not recruit. Also, thanks to mangled clauses in the first sentence, I should point out that I meant the troops are "dying for no good reason", rather than that we are pointing this out without good reason. :P OK, I gotta start drafting and proofreading my comments in another window. Apologies.
We must stop this communist from even speaking his vile trash. We're at war. God Bless America -- my homeland, not yours, liberals.
Philly Cheese
Cheezy Phil.
What's so "extreme" about that ad? It's exactly the kind of thing that needs to be said: the president is a liar, and he's sacrificing your sons and daughters as cannon fodder to promote his agenda.
Being "nice" and "moderate" won't work. The Republicans are masters at demagoging the patriotism issue, and demonizing anyone who criticizes Bush on anything. They will play the flag-waving stuff to the hilt against even the mildest criticism. Most "moderate" Democrats will soften their message in hopes of being less vulnerable to attacks on their patriotism. But all that will accomplish is to make them look weak and insincere to the public, and give the Repugs a whiff of blood in the water. The only way to fight back is to be absolutely uncompromising and unapologetic about telling what a worthless piece of shit Bush really is.
Wow.
I consider myself an expert on weakness for reasons I won't elaborate here, and I perceive the democrats as embarassing weenies. All the candidates should embrace this ad.
Kucinich is voicing a wonderful vision. If we don't talk about what we really want, it will never come true. Lets top being bound by the current reality. Lets start making the reality we want.
"you can't endorse a candidate that you obviously admire and respect because not enough people would want to be led by someone they admire and respect. You have a one party system; please consider voting for an actual human being."
Ah, the Naderite One-Party system returns! Hail, unwelcome meme...now sit the fuck down.
What about '7 wars in 5 years' don't you understand? The Iraq invasion is just the first step of a coherent plan of world domination via selective genocide and sheer military terror.
So, yes, we have a TWO party system in America: one that does NOT support that REIGN OF 'ERROR, and a party that is being outed for total hypocrisy on a daily basis.
Do not vote for the Error Party with their World Domination bastardation of the American Revolution. Our goal is to foster the system where ALL PEOPLE EVERYWHERE live as good a life, as complete a life, AS THEY SEE IT, as the human race in toto can manage.
Vote THAT Party. Vote Dean. No war for profit. No needless civilian deaths. No quasi-military corporate invasions. We do not want to be BUGS, big fat greedy bugs. We want to be human beings!
There's a lot more of this type stuff coming. Someone Democrat is going to benefit from this. Remain above the fray because the grassroots will do the dirty work. Powerful ad.
"We must stop this communist from even speaking his vile trash. We're at war. God Bless America -- my homeland, not yours, liberals.
Philly Cheese"
Vile Philly, the racist. You can't be an American if you are a racist, Phil.
Your Preznit's war was an utter lie from top to bottom. What about the facts can't you handle?
He is going to get credit in the future for removing Saddam Hussein from power by the most brutal means imaginable, killing 40,000 civilians in another Panama invasion, except one where it was much easier to install a puppet government to manage the canal zone for us.
The war Bx is fighting is the attempt to destabilize the Middle East to gain masterful profits from whatever is leftover. But nevermind that - can't you deal with the fact that Bxco did ZERO planning for occupied Iraq? Is that how you want to run a war you've been planning for several decades?
Bxco's negligence on 9-11 is not how any of us in the 'Put Some Clothes On, You Naked War Criminal' Party want to run the effort to defeat war and terrorism. Unlike you racists, we want to do it with PEACE.
And we want to put your Prince in a striped suit, let him rake weeds for the rest of his life.
Philly G,
Amazing how you alleged conservatives (of the neo variety, apparently) go from fearing the government to worshipping it the minute you reach the water's edge.
Why does Acton's law cease to be common sense and become treason when you switch from domestic to foreign policy?
Despite the bromide about liberals thinking with their hearts instead of their heads, I think liberals and conservatives are just guilty of that fault in different ways. With conservatives (with the exception of a few Lew Rockwell paleos), you shut off your heads and go into full visceral mode when the President wraps himself in the flag and says the magic words "national security."
The cry of the sheeple is heard in the land: Baaaaaa! Baaaaaa! Baaaaaa!
There is absolutely no way that the named corporations would ever, ever sue for the allegations made in that piece.
Suing would open themselves up for a discovery process, where they would need to disclose all the documents related to those allegations, and subject their officers to having to make testamentary discovery under oath and penalty of perjury.
Take Bechtel, for instance. There is just no way that they would consent to allowing Dennis Kucinich's people comb through the personal e-mail logs of the corporation's executives, looking for communications between executives and the Administration.
IT's a good message, but it took me five or twn minutes to recover from a Flash-induced seizure.
"I think the party could use a few more like him - we need to shore up our left flank a little bit - but that's not the same thing as saying our party should be run by people like him."
This is exactly why many of us just can't regard the Democrats as "our party". In spite of all the rhetoric, the Dems *still* can't distinguish themselves from the Reps on a whole series of nasty issues ("free" trade, welfare "reform", general antipathy toward universal health care...). When Joe Lieberman is considered a moderate, just "shoring up our left flank" is a far cry from sufficient.
Anonymous' long exercise in copyright infringement, by reposting an entire article, is just an overlong Appeal to Authority. -- April
You are obviously a tool of big business if you think that was a copyright violation. Read up on fair use for non-commercial purposes.
"Amazing how you alleged conservatives (of the neo variety, apparently) go from fearing the government to worshipping it the minute you reach the water's edge.
"
Amazing how alleged liberals (of the hate-america variety) go from wanting to use the military as an international police force to wanting to become isolationistic (a la Bucannan).
Where were you guys when the Clintonistas were lobbing missles in Iraq? and Bosnia? and Somalia?
It is also amusing to hear people who support Castro complaining about 'suppression of dissent'. I guess you guys figure it is only oppression when it is happening to the other guy, right?
Hypocrites.
"Hipocrite"
There are quite a few generalizations in your post about "alleged liberals."
There are many to your Left who complained and protested against Clinton's bombing. You were probably too busy investigating sex scandals to notice. Get a life.
Unlike the Republicans, Liberals don't often agree on everything- and tend not to march in lockstep.
Why don't you take this quiz and find out where you lie on the political spectrum? (I suspect I could place you within a few degrees without seeing any of your responses).
Go ahead-- take the test.
The Political Compass
Characters Remaining:
Commenting by HaloScan
