Your writing reminds me of a dude who has his entire life's thoughts written down on little napkins and post-it notes. It's just so all over the place that I am having a difficult time even knowing where to begin.
I guess I will start here: Of course there are differences between politicians. Does one need to even point out such an obvious thing? Let alone then to have to get into detailed debates on obscure online forums about the differences? At this point, for me, it feels more like engaging in the daily gossip about today's soap operas then anything else.
I am more interested in focusing on the systemic problems that we are facing right now - namely how do we deal with the fact that the federal government has crossed the Rubicon. It's difficult for me to imagine how Congress, much like the Roman senate during the last days of their republic, could be brought back to representing the people and cleansed of its endemic corruption. It's not because of the differences in politicians that this happened... it's systemic! Read "Democracy Inc Managed Democracy and the Specter of Inverted Totalitarianism" by Sheldon Wolin and get back to me. Wolin's type of thinking and critical analysis - thinking that reaches deep into the systemic problems we are facing - is where my line of thinking resonates.
Cayo 2 wrote: Apparently your sense of social justice includes dis proportionate punishment; Your willingness to stab the people in the back who have been defending the values you claim to hold for decades and have'nt sold out, shows how little understanding you have of the history and context that led us to this point.
This statement of yours is a logical fallacy. I make a comment about the 2000 Ralph Nader election issue, and how voting for the lesser-evil is not my cup of tea. And this is your response? It does not logically follow that because I disagree with the Nader issue and voting for the lesser-evil that I then "stab the people in the back who have been defending my values", and how I have "little understanding" of what is happening right now.
In fact, it is quite the opposite... I support and cherish those who defend my values. And if I can vote for them in an election whether it be local, state or federal, I vote for them.
Cayo 2 wrote: You are however wrong in claiming it did not help Bush win Florida no matter how many times you use the word meme in a post.
Of course Nader had a part in Bush winning the election. My point was to say that it is disingenuous to blame only him. Did you do that? No, my apology for making it seem as if this was the case. I was only trying to attack the message about Nader being the only reason Bush lost because I find it to be disingenuous. I do remember your past stuff on voter disenfranchisement.
Cayo 2 wrote: I don't really need a lecture on the evils of US imperialism or the ills of neo liberalism from some johnny come lately snot nosed punk who knows a fraction of what I do about it.
Another logical fallacy - straw man. Where in this post did I lecture you about US imperialism and neo-liberalism? NOWHERE!
It's real easy to create a straw man and fire away, huh? BTW, nice little attack the messenger thrown in there too.
Look, Cayo... I'm currently in school full-time and working to try and better myself... so I don't really care to continue having an online conversation with a person who half the time makes smart comments, the other half is engaging in logical fallacies, and who also throws out personal insults. I have much more enlightening things to read, learn, and do in my life... then try to discern your scatter brained posts.
And I will end my conversation with you here - for good: Please refrain from engaging in future conversations with me. I will do the same for you. You have nothing to offer me, no offense. And I don't expect that I have anything to offer you at this time either.
A johnny come lately snot nosed punk who knows a fraction of what you do.