> I shouldn't have even replied to this thread.
> Jerry's question should have been considered rhetorical.
> I know of no reason why Max, a man whose work I admire, would support
> murderous policies of any Dem and I doubt Jerry actually has such a
> concern.
> I'd be more than shocked if Max took such a position.
You are wrong John. I wasn't asking a rhetorical question. I consider Obama a war criminal in making because I consider the presidency an institution that maintains U.S. dominance and there is simply no way to maintain U.S. dominance without supporting atrocities, starvation, repression, the death squad in Honduras, the right-wing militias in Colombia, control of Middle East Oil, the military system that divides the whole world into regional commands and then gives each regional commander proconsular power complete with diplomats and the ability to trump the state department. Obama is in favor of this system. He is not opposed to it. As president he will be executive of the owning class and corporations.
And yet, let me confess, I will probably take the 5 minutes it takes me to walk down to my polling station and vote for Obama. Simply because the people in power now are some of the worse gang of authoritarian terrorists the world has known. Obama will probably be a return to "normal" imperialist domination. The current administration, including McCain, are more likely to lead to a drastic tragedy for all humanity than either an Obama or Clinton administration. But both an Obama or Clinton administration will still be one of the most dangerous forces threatening the existence of humanity in the world. They will both continue the 40 year old nuclear policy that threatens the world. They both say so. Both will continue to maintain U.S. corporate dominance and both will try to marginalize democracy around the world. They both say they will.
Max in his comments here shows no consciousness that he is voting for Obama without illusions. The fact that he even has to ask me "which murderous policies" shows that he just doesn't want to acknowledge the normal operation of U.S. power as murderous.
If Clinton was in the position that Obama is now in I would oppose her as vehemently and probably vote for her against McCain. But people like Max and so many other "good hearted" liberals and "idealistic" young people would have less illusions about Clinton. It is the fact of illusions in Obama among people that I wish to become allies in the fight against this corporate dominated system that brings me to argue more against Obama than I would have to argue against Clinton.
Jerry
>
> That said, Max knows there has never been and never will be an example
> of US military intervention as an "active presence" to maintain the US
> as "a key player" that wasn't murderous.
John, It is not specifically military intervention that I am calling U.S. murderous policies, it is the day-to-day operation of U.S. political and economic dominance. This dominance is enforced by a military system, aggression and torture. But it is the day to day operation of that Max (and you) don't seem to see is murderous. It is this system that Obama wants to administer.
Jerry
>
> It is a physically impossible for such a policy to be non-murderous
> making Max's reply "If they didn't, like, murder anybody." difficult if
> not impossible to take seriously.
> I know some list members don't like the term Obamamania but I don't see
> people whose work I admire and who should know better making similar
> statements concerning Clinton.
> If that happens it would be an example of Clintonmania in my opinion.
>
> I've yet to see Clinton's official position on H.R. 2824 but Obama has
> come out against it making him the only CBC member to do so IIRC.
> This has earned him much respect in the Native American community and
> has also resulted in similar unrealistic pronouncements being issued
> from people who should know better.
> His position did leave him some wiggle room but it was just what most
> Native Americans wanted to hear.
>
> I initially preferred Edwards of the top three and I just heard he has
> announced his support of Obama.
> I haven't heard if this means he is the likeliest to be tapped for VP by
> Obama but he always seemed the likeliest for either Obama or Clinton.
> I don't see how anyone could seriously have entertained an Obama/Clinton
> or Clinton/Obama ticket but I've seen it bandied about.
>
> John Thornton
>
>
>
> Carrol Cox wrote:
> > John Thornton wrote:
> >
> >> Obama states:
> >>
> >> "It is conceivable that a significantly reduced U.S. force might remain
> >> in Iraq for a more extended period of time. Such a reduced but active
> >> presence will also send a clear message to hostile countries like Iran
> >> and Syria that we intend to remain a key player in this region."
> >>
> >> How is an "active presence" as "a key player" not a murderous policy in
> >> this instance?
> >>
> >
> > Liberals have nothing going for them but an intense faith that somehow
> > things will be better. Obama is the latest peg for that empty hope. In
> > another 3 to 5 years there will be another (equally weak) peg and
> > another and another. They will still be holding on to that hope as the
> > Eastern seacoast floods, as power riots rage in the cities, as
> > Third-World dictators (but friends of American Freedom) gain nuclear
> > capacity, etc.
> >
> > Carrol
> >
> > ___________________________________
> > http://mailman.lbo-talk.org/mailman/listinfo/lbo-talk
> >
> >
>
> ___________________________________
> http://mailman.lbo-talk.org/mailman/listinfo/lbo-talk
>
-- Jerry Monaco's Philosophy, Politics, Culture Weblog is Shandean Postscripts to Politics, Philosophy, and Culture http://monacojerry.livejournal.com/
His fiction, poetry, weblog is Hopeful Monsters: Fiction, Poetry, Memories http://www.livejournal.com/users/jerrymonaco/
Notes, Quotes, Images - From some of my reading and browsing http://www.livejournal.com/community/jerry_quotes/