Michael Moore Says Something Very Peculiar... And Perhaps Prescient

[Segami]

Run time: 00:59 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QQ97ZcrAUzQ   Posted on YouTube: October 28, 2011 By YouTube Member: hidnusr10 Views on YouTube: 73   Posted on DU: October 28, 2011 By DU Member: Segami Views on DU: 12834

 

[dotymed]

1. If it walks like a duck...... n/t

[zentrum]

90. Moore is naive

....in this one instance.

The reason ALEC and Rove etc are not making sure they have an electable candidate is because they know the next four years are going to be economic armageddon and they want it to fall on Obama's watch. They want the Democrats to get the blame. They perceive him as weak and unable to do the things that would keep the flood from happening.

Secondly, they *are* still concentrating on the governorships and Congress--the places where unions are destroyed and where laws are made and where Judges are blockaded.

They want O to be associated with a completely discredited Democratic party brand which they anticipate will come from the continued recession/depression and then they will sweep in (in their plan) in 2016--with Jeb or Christie.

That's why they are ignoring the 2012 Presidential race. It would be terrible to win. They know how bad the economy really is and they don't want their name and their guy on the masthead.

So it's a trick. There must be some name in sports for this kind of fake-out.

[vanbean]

91. Yeah. That is one thing I have always noticed about Moore. He is naive in some instances.

:sarcasm:

You are making the same point he is. Can't you see that?

[DallasNE]

96. That Is Not How The Political Animal Works

While it is always difficult to line up quality candidates when the odds look long the political animal will alway try to beat the odds rather than standing idlely by as the opponent clobbers your guy/gal. That effort could also have the unintended consequence of losing control of the House. Yes, they would still have the filibuster in the Senate but that is wearing thin and could cause backlash for Republican incumbents.

After a summer slowdown the economy is showing new signs of life. Jobs, being a lagging indicator, will take longer to recover but that could improve substantially next summer, in the lead up to the election. Republicans, accordingly, are at their strongest right now and Obama leads all Republicans nationwide. Obama also leads in a must have State for Republicans (Ohio). Apparently independent voters have a lower opinion of the potential Republican candidate than they have for Obama.

[vanlassie]

2. Wow.

[RowdyRacer]

3. What's "peculiar" about that??

Obama is just playing good cop, bad cop with us and the GOP.

[leeroysphitz]

9. +1

[russspeakeasy]

16. There is a great book that makes the point..

"With Liberty and Justice For Some", by Glenn Greenwald. I'm only halfway through it, but it is great reading for anyone interested in OWS.

[FarLeftFist]

83. It's as if Moore forgets that EVERY GOP candidate is the rich's favorite.

[RufusTFirefly]

4. Yup. Think it through, folks. n/t

[dixiegrrrrl]

5. Not a new idea, now or in 2008.

but a horribly unpopular one to express in some places.

[chervilant]

18. Yeah...

I'm totally surprised at the current lack of rebuttal from teh Sycophants. Used to be, they would rant and trot out Teh Hallowed List. Not seeing that so much anymore...

[FedUp_Queer]

28. Their OFA checks haven't arrived yet.

[civilisation]

6. the corporate oligarchs have no "party",.

they support whomever will works for them. One need only look at the Wall Street appointments made so far by Obama,. bankers to regulate bankers,. . lol.

[RufusTFirefly]

7. Noooooo! It's Team of Rivals! It's, uh, three-dimensional chess!!!

You just don't get it.

[Aaria]

54. They have both.

[valerief]

8. Zactly. nt

[Enrique]

10. i can't watch youtube at work

what did he say?

[RaleighNCDUer]

11. In summary:

The Republican candidates are all certifiable, and not to be taken seriously by anyone. If the Republican are the party of the rich, why have the rich not seen to it they have their man at the head of the pack? Unless, of course, they don't need to have their man at the head of the Republican ticket.

[Enrique]

12. ouch

thanks for the summary! :hi:

[abq e streeter]

13. Basically, speculating on why the wealthy don't seem concerned about all the crazies

running for the repub nomination, and that maybe it's because they think they already have their man in President Obama.And that if that's true then "we're in for a longer haul than just igloos this winter in NY" (not exact word for word but gist of it)

[abq e streeter]

14. Oops- but nice to see RaleighNCDUer answered too, while I was typing my reply.

[Enrique]

17. thanks!

where was Moore speaking, was this on CNN with Piers Morgan?

[proverbialwisdom]

20. Interview from Countdown with Keith Olbermann on Current TV.

I find CNN unwatchable.

[Hissyspit]

45. FULL VIDEO of Interview Here:

PART 1: http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=385x629194

PART 2: http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=385x629195

[Enthusiast]

99. "I find CNN unwatchable."

Me too.

[abq e streeter]

21. Talking with Keith Olbermann on Countdown

[abq e streeter]

22. Looks like I'm a few seconds behind the rest of the world today----

[Segami]

60. Here is a transcript of Michael Moore's comments on CurrentTV with KO.

Sorry for posting this transcript a bit late but CURRENT TV's transcripts were not available earlier on.



MOORE: Well, then, that’s very smart thinking on their part. I think, too — if I could broaden the Democratic Party problem here to a national scale.


OLBERMANN: Yes, please.


MOORE: You’ve got these nine Republicans running, all right? And, of course, we all laugh, and there’s the joke about — you can make about each one of them. And we know that our fellow Americans, at the end of the day — they’re not going to go in the voting booth and vote for crazy. Even though they might be upset at Obama, they’re not going to go crazy.


So, it begs the question then. If this is the party of the rich — the Republicans — if this is the party of wealth and Wall Street, the party that brought about the crash of ’08, why don’t the wealthy — why aren’t the wealthy — making sure they have a Republican that’s running that’s gonna win?


It doesn’t look like they’re concerned at all about making sure they’ve their man on the Republican ticket unless — unless they believe they’ve got their man on the Democratic Party ticket?


OLBERMANN: Yeah.


MOORE: And if that’s the case — okay, well — then we are in for a longer haul than just igloos in the winter here in Manhattan.





http://current.com/shows/countdown/blog/complete-transcript-of-the-october-27-2011-edition-of-countdown-with-keith-olbermann


.

[bertman]

15. Sad to say that Michael nailed it again. REC. nt

[nineteen50]

19. Finally others are beginning to see

[libinnyandia]

23. Moore is an idiot

This from a man who supported Ralph Nader in 2000. If it were only that: run a true progressive for president, get 61 progressive senators and 238 progressive representatives elected, get 5 progressive jistices on the Supreme Court and our problems will be solved. Actually if it hadn't been for nader and his supporters like Moore, we would have 5 non-right wing justices. Roberts and Alito would,t be on the court. It sounds like Moore woiud like Ralph to run again.

[quark219]

25. Classic ad-hominem attack...

... based on events over a decade past, no less. Looks like Michael Moore's observation struck a nerve.

[Segami]

26. Old. stale attack tricks. Nothing new here.

[libinnyandia]

27. old events

Old events from 10 years ago le to 8 years of bush and cheney. Gore equals Bush was a lie then and there will be similar lies now.

[quark219]

43. Sorry. But...

... when you begin a post with "Moore is an idiot," you lose all credibility and I take nothing you say seriously. I'm just being frank.

[libinnyandia]

48. Moore

That is no worse than saying Gore + Bush. A lot of people took Moore seriously in 2000 and bought in to his arguments. The sad thing is people like Moore, Donahue, Nader, etc is that after the election and this country was saddled with 8 years of Bush and Chaney, people began to question their ideas and motives. They will never have the influence they had before. What positive things came about because of their efforts in 2000? I ask this question as someone who worked for a Nader inspired organization for most of the 1980s.hey have no positive contributions to the conversation. Obama = Romney, Perry, Cain, Bachmann, etc is wrong.

[savannah43]

70. Yeah, it's all his fault. If he was so powerful, we'd be in charge.

I'd argue with you, but you're too ridiculous for me to waste my time on. There is this picture that keeps going through my mind when I read your comments. It looks like a blooming onion. Oh, wait--it's a blooming idiot. Bye. Maher is on in 2 minutes.

[Admiral Loinpresser]

72. I said Moore was wrong in real time in 2000

and I'm saying in real time that he's right in 2011. Barack Obama is not fit to tie Al Gore's shoes.

[DocMac]

92. Oboma has done SOME good.

Please don't make me list the fails. Unless you have the stomach for it.

[FedUp_Queer]

29. Such excrement.

The notion that the election was even close shows how poor a campaign Gore ran. In addition, the notion that someone should not run for president, that we should defer to the powers that be, is repugnant to a free society.

[glowing]

41. Bush was selected. Gore won the election, The Supreme Court decided the 2000 election.

Had Gore ran his campaign in the manner in which he works today, Nader wouldn't have been on anyone's radar. The DLC and the Koch funds that supported the DLC are more to blame than Nader.

Had The People taken to the streets and NOT accepted the ruling of the Supreme Court, then perhaps we wouldn't have gone down this rabbit hole.. However, if it wasn't for these Rich, robber barons being so damned greedy and tipping their hand in such a widespread, notable fashion, then we would still be the frog slowly warming up to cook in the pot. Because Bush was so bad, and because every branch of our political structure is so corrupt and bought, people cannot avoid it, keep their heads down, and "play by the rules" any longer. Occupy happened because people are righteously angry. There is no hiding behind lies anymore. The media, the politicians, the robber barons, the world wide response to the corruption and theft of people's labor cannot be denied. Its been thrown into everyone's faces.

You know how the Mayan Calendar ends in 2012.. I think it means that the system of rulers and power structure will be ended. People will be awake. And we will shift into a new paradigm of mutual respect for one another and for our planet's environment. I believe we are already erasing the idea of border lines that separate country lines. We are realizing how much we have in common and how the "leaders" of these nations have lied us into hating one another and dividing us based on nationality, religion, language, and customs to the point of warring rackets (that coincidentally make TPTB wealthier even more in a totally destructive manner). The whole world is watching, the whole world is ready, the whole world can be what we want it to be. We can rid ourselves of horrible pictures of children fading away because they have no food, we can rid ourselves of wage slavery, we can rid ourselves of people not getting medical care because they are "poor", we can rid ourselves of corruptions... We can create wonderful local communities that are invested in one another and also responsibly live in a manner that is sustainable for the world. Education, love, and people power should be all of our goals.

[Aaria]

55. What make s you think they only steal the final leg of the election.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=k7rPnA2ZqT4

[Chef Eric]

47. Um, yeah. Michael Moore is speaking to us "in code."

Just parse his words, and you can tell that he's trying to drum up support for another Nader campaign.

[HowHeThinks]

102. Or.........

maybe he's trying to remove the scales from the eyes of a certain faction who believe Obama is still the savior, the messiah, and can do no wrong. These people actually exist (although not in such great numbers lately). And nowhere did I hear him mention anything about Ralph Nader, or anyone else. Perhaps your "code" breaking skills are somewhat overstated? :shrug:

[Chef Eric]

112. Perhaps you should take a second and read the post to which I was replying?

If you do that, then maybe you'll realize that I was mocking the writer of that post for not paying attention to what Michael Moore was saying. HE was the one who brought up Ralph Nader.

Okay?

[chervilant]

50. Geez...

They're scraping the bottom of the barrel for trolls these days...

[bitchkitty]

68. Moore is not an idiot. It's idiotic to call him an idiot.

The idiots are those who cling to the idea that Obama is in some way a liberal, progressive, or even a Democrat in the truest sense of the word.

[stockholmer]

69. I would love to see Nader run again, he is a true man of principle, unlike.............

(fill in the blank with 95% plus of current politicians, including the current 1600 Penn Ave resident).

Get over 2000, Nader didn't cost Gore the election, that is situational sour grapes. Gore himself, Clinton's lingering miasma over his stupidity in regards to his attempt to cover up for his easy access zipper, and the BushCo demons cost Gore the election. You also give Gore way too much potential credit in regards to Supreme Court picks.

Almost every major policy stance that Nader has stood for his long life is supported by 90% of the people on this board, versus less than 40 or 50% of Obama's actions. If Obama were a Republican, and had passed the same corporatist agenda, launched (or expanded) the same bloody empiric wars he actually has, he would be hated on here.

The left cover Obama gives to the further fascistic take-over and consolidation of the US is pure poison for the citizens of the world. The tragedy will forever be his wasted potential to throw a monkey wrench into the gears of the machine, and his strategic oiling of it instead.

[ChadwickHenryWard]

76. "There is not a dime's worth of difference between the Democratic and Republican parties."

This statement is more true now than it was when Nader said it.

[Scott the Accountant]

79. What He's Saying...

...is sort of what I've been saying for awhile.

Our leaders are being told which levers to pull or buttons to push by the overseas bankers. I don't care how many camp sites go up. The fix is in.

[tomp]

85. yeah, that's the problem with america...

....ralph nader and michael moore.

dumb ass shits like you are the problem, you fucking idiot.

[think4yourself]

86. If by idiot you mean brilliant, then I agree.

I watched this live and was glad he succinctly put into words what millions are thinking. THAT is why he is
far from being an "idiot". His "idiotic" film "Sicko" brought the healthcare debate back where it belonged.
I would offer that there's so little difference between the two parties that they have to put up
these laughable but memorable jokers.
This election should be Obama's to lose. How disgusting that he should be contemplating spending a BILLION dollars to be re-elected. THAT is the truly sad
state of The State. What's wrong with pointing to your accomplishments and saying, "Give me four more years!"
The real tragedy is that America is so low-informed, they believe the obnoxious TV commercials and choose their candidate because of a 30 second bullshit ad.

[Enthusiast]

100. Mike was very reluctant to come to this conclusion.

The debt ceiling theater was the clincher for me.

[democracy1st]

116. His economic team was the eye opener for me

[Name removed]

24. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Hissyspit]

46. What do you mean his "motives are sometimes questionable?"

Do you mean his TACTICS are sometimes questionable? As in you don't agree with them being used or how they are used?

I have seen no reason in the past 20 years to question his motives.

[iamthebandfanman]

101. not sure why my original post was deleted ..but..

i just mean sometimes money can effect people in different ways... hes only human

[tea and oranges]

30. Or it Could Be

That they're certain they can steal the vote that it doesn't matter about the crazy.

[RaleighNCDUer]

31. I really don't know which possibility scares me more. nt

[Jim_Shorts]

32. There is a reason why the rethuglian candidates are crazy

If you move just one step to the right of Obama, that is what you get.

[Enrique]

33. the rich have their man in Romney

I don't agree with his premise that they're not backing a serious candidate. They are solidly behind Romney.

[Segami]

34. The ' rich 'might have their man but what about

locking up the ' Christians ' support for Romney? Is their support important or irrelevant? Have Christians been taught to accept Mormonism as a cult? Do you think they would vote to elect a cult member? That leaves their so called ' serious candidate ' as having a snowball's chance in hell of winning the 2012 election.

[ChandlerJr]

35. All Moore is pointing out is that the real wealthy and powerful in this

country don't really care who the President, or for that matter congress, is. They do just fine with who ever is in "power". They see DC as just a bunch of transients who come and go but the real powers remain.

[dixiegrrrrl]

38. Which is exactly what Carlin pointed out over and over.

[L. Coyote]

39. You don't attend may Dem functions, do you?

Don't expect tie-dye or even jeans, it's glitz and gold, high-priced drinks, yata, yata, all too often, just ask Pelosi! The lettuce pickers don't run CA politics, for example, those with interests in the public coffers do.

There are two political factions vying for control of the huge purse strings that is government, the rich conservatives and the rich liberals. Their inherent greed is no longer easily covered up with nationalistic propaganda when everyone can see we are not living "the dream" because the one percent in control, the full-political-spectrum of the RICH, have privatized the public purse for decades to come with staggering debt, debt incurred via transfer of public wealth to their private purses. It is political dysfunctionalism, and their are two obvious cures, change them or change them out. Some combination which keeps the best of them, the idealists, and gets rid of the corrupt hogs at the trough and the mindless minions of corporate greed may be in the works with the Occupy consciousness emerging just in time for 2012. Those in office have little time to demonstrate if they merit retention, especially Barack Obama (assuming we have fair elections).

[bongbong]

57. Great Comment!

"There are two political factions vying for control of the huge purse strings that is government, the rich conservatives and the rich liberals. "

EXACTLY! It's two rich sets of people fighting over who gets the money from the Taxpayers. Whose cronies will get the contracts. Kinda like rival drug gangs fighting over turf. Follow the Benjamins.

Before 1980 there were more differences between the parties. But that difference was much less than the differences pre-1910 or so. It's been a steady takeover.

[DocMac]

94. Which is why we have OWS!

They don't even try to hide it. They consider the game won.

But I have won before with 3 pawns and a king vs. a rook and a king.

The end game is special.

[bongbong]

115. I can see that

3 connected pawns are a force to be reckoned with in the endgame. If I had move advantage, I would take those over anybody ranked 2000 or less with a Rook (I never broke 1600, but the high point of my chess days was when I beat a 2190 at speed)

At least two metaphors there for OWS :-)

[HomerRamone]

87. "(assuming we have fair elections)"

How can anyone possibly assume that?

[L. Coyote]

111. With DRE's, all we have is the assumption!

So, you are correct. Tthe assumption is baseless, I assume you mean.

[L. Coyote]

36. Outing the Sidley-Austin intern --- what a surprise, eh?

Who knew the President/intern-for-the world's-largest-corporate-law-firm would not be a revolutionary progressive?

I did. Just search the DU archives for Sidley-Austin!

[libinnyandia]

37. Republicans can win if the Democrats are divided

If people like Moore have their way, the Republicans wil win. They never learn from 2000. The way thet Nader , Moore, etc campaigned: Gore = Bush lie, etc made it possible for the GOP to win in 2000. If Moore and co. play the same game this time, the same thing can happen. Never under eNstmate the gullibility of voters: some buy the GOP's lies, some buy Moore's lies. They both lie.

[savannah43]

71. Never underestimate the desperation of trolls.

[stockholmer]

73. as long as your only choice is between corporatist Repubs and Dems, the nation and the world lose

The argument that the two parties should represent opposed ideals and policies, one, perhaps, of the Right and the other of the Left, is a foolish idea acceptable only to the doctrinaire and academic thinkers. Instead, the two parties should be almost identical, so that the American people can "throw the rascals out" at any election without leading to any profound or extreme shifts in policy.

- Carrol Quigley, Tragedy and Hope (1966)

[ooglymoogly]

78. There is not a gag reflex strong enough. nt

[SharksBreath]

110. I only have one word to say about Gore. Liberman.

Kind of says it all.

[Douglas Carpenter]

40. I sure the hell wish I could convince myself that he is wrong. But, unfortunately....

[swilton]

42. Thank you Segami!

I picked that up from the MM website/interview but was unable to capture and share as you have....Perfect; you nailed it!!! I hope everyone pays attention to what Michael Moore is saying....

[peacetalksforall]

44. I resent the talk that targets the messenger for the thought he expressed.

I was one who was extremely angry with Moore in 2000 and for many years.

He didn't repeat Nader support in 2004 or 08.

He has made fine documentaries in a way that many don't want to miss; doc's that are educational, doc's that people recommend.

He's out there for the right reasons.

He thinks laterally with good results.

He just made a simple case for a valid question which I have been wondering about also.

I've been answering it by saying that they are going to bring in a seasoned PNACer type at the last minute, but I can also go along with Republicans turning this into a circus because they do want Obama.

The only thing that people can criticize is the Moore stated it as 'they have their man'. Super blunt.

All true and obvious at this point in time.

For me, I say it in what is a worse way, but realistic - they have already found their Bilderberg man.

[PDJane]

49. Well, either that or the game is thoroughly rigged again.

That's how Bush got in; don't discount it happening again.

[Aaria]

56. Hmmm, what makes you think that the Puppet Master is going to let the ...

peoples actually have a choice in the matter. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=k7rPnA2ZqT4

[PDJane]

66. Yeah, I remember Curtis.

And the whole rigged game. That's precisely what I meant.

[femrap]

51. It's all just

one big party now....the party of Greed and Oppression.

[obxhead]

52. They LOVE life right now. They are getting it ALL....

all the benefits of a Republican President and the ability to blame it all on Democrats!

[harun]

53. Don't know how anyone could say he is wrong on this. The 1% have their men on the Supreme Court

and have plenty of them in both houses of Congress. Obama certainly isn't able to do anything against them nor is he even trying. He knows they will just shut everything down and make the system stop until the next guy gets in there.

This is the easy stuff to figure out.

[newcomer]

58. Upcoming Elections

Rest assured the owners of this country are quite happy with
the control they have over congress and the white house; and
they are most likely working behind the scenes to ensure they
lock in another congress district by district....

[Dont call me Shirley]

59. The gop put kooks on the ballot in 2010 and half of them got elected! So.....

[DeSwiss]

61. Spot on Mikey.

"Once you eliminate the impossible, whatever remains, no matter how improbable, must be the truth." ~Sherlock Holmes, The Sign of Four

- K&R

[JJW]

62. Die Furher hat keine Kleider

[Beam Me Up]

63. This really shouldn't be news to anyone. Even here.

Politics in this country has been little more than theatre to entertain and keep the masses distracted for quite some time.

That is the beauty of the 99% meme: It draws the line in the sand quite accurately, clearly and succinctly. It's US vs. the PTB and THEY run BOTH Rs and Ds.

[Scruffy1]

64. Unfortunately, you are correct.

I no longer believe that elected officials wield any real power and have to live with the fact they must go with the money or be out on the street. A corporate oligarchy that can elect the likes of Rand Paul has got to scare anyone about the future of America. There are a few dems in safe seats who are allowed to make noise occasionally, but they are small in number and ineffectual.

[pam4water]

65. K&R

[jimlup]

67. Er Eh I know it isn't polite to say it here but

He's spot on with this one.

[snagglepuss]

74. I've been thinking that for awhile but I'd go further. The elite have the leader

they want but it serves their interest to have the 99% divided so they have fanned the insanity coming from the teabaggers. Not only do teabaggers retard any reforms that would help the 99% but their presence gives the illusion that the US is a two party state and justifies Obama claiming that bipartisanship has necessitated his scaling back on promises.

[ChadwickHenryWard]

75. This is nothing new.

Wealthy business interests always hedge their bets by giving heavily to both parties. Obama was awash with cash last time and he won't have any trouble fundraising this time.

[stevenleser]

77. There is a much better answer than the one Moore offered.

THe answer is, what Republican could they offer? Who do they have that is better than these guys? They don't have anybody. No conspiracy theory is needed to explain this. And the other side of that is, if they did have somebody, in order to win the nomination, they have to appeal to the Teabagger base and that would make them seem crazy anyway.

The other side of this is, you will see once there is a Republican nominee just how seriously the rich want them to win. With Citizens United, I expect a massive amount of funds to be funnelled to that person.

If THAT does not happen, then come back to me and lets discuss conspiracy theories because at that point I would be a believer. Failing that, this theory of Moore's is not workable.

[certainot]

80. moore is in a long line of progressives with no time to know what's been kicking their ass for 20 yr

i love michael's work but the biggest political blunder the last 20 yrs is the ability of the 'left' to ignore the right's best weapon because it hurts their heads to listen to it.

and so they evaluate politics as if it 1000 think tank coordinated radio stations don't exist. and it continues to kick our ass.

as long as the left has NO coordinated response to the right's best weapon it cannot say it ever got obama's back.

and until that happens attacks on obama's ability to effect fundamental reforms are pissant bullshit.

[FarLeftFist]

81. OK, what the hell is MM talking about?! EVERY SINGLE GOP candidate IS the rich's favorite.

Every one of them is willing to completely bend over backwards for the rich. You don't see the rich shilling for a certain GOP candidate because any one of them will do. Their probably hoping the stupidest, most easily manipulated candidate gets chosen. MM is dead wrong about his assumption, but he's still extremely credible.

[mmonk]

82. It's sad it's even a thought to consider.

[Jakes Progress]

84. Yep. Seems pretty obvious. They've got their man.

Some of the stuff we get from this administration, stuff the right has wanted for a long time, stuff like privatization of American education, immunity for wall street theft, war profits, cuts to medicare and medicaid, stuff like that -- they could never get that though with a republican president. If a republican president tried, all Democrats would rise up in anger. But with a jazzy Democrat in office, the party is divided between those following principle and those falling for personality. Divide and conquer. It works to bust unions. Now it co-opts the Democratic Party.

[vssmith]

97. Well said

[SunDrop23]

88. Excellent point (nfm)

[zentrum]

89. Obama doesn't have to be "their man"

...in any extreme way for them to prefer him to the crazies.

Crazy is not good for business or the markets or stability. The behavior of the Reps during the debt ceiling debate was unnerving for WS.

The crazies are actually harder to control than a "reasonable" right-of-centerist who was trained in one of their academies (Harvard) and who has them (Summers, Geithner) on his team..

It's just pragmatic and not any more sinister than the use they made of Clinton.

I mean it is harmful to the 99, but because we under a corrupt system---not because O is their secret Manchurian candidate "inside guy".

[vanbean]

93. Also, remember that he could have been "influenced" in an assertive way.

Notice I said "could have". Who knows anymore? Paranoia seems normal in these times.

[vanbean]

95. Do you realize the courage it takes for him to say this? Not to mention integrity.

(Inadequate words)

[Enthusiast]

98. I was a rabid Obama supporter in 2008.

I watched him piss away an opportunity to rein in pharmaceutical prices and give us a public option. Then I watched him extend the *bush* tax cuts which directly resulted in the phony debt ceiling theater. They plan to use this theater as a means to cut social security and medicare.

No, I'm done pretending the President is on my side. Clear done.

[quark219]

107. You and me both, friend. (N/T)

[sandyj999]

103. Listen to Michael

He knows of what he speaks. He will be put down by some for saying it but I am in total agreement with him.

[jman0]

104. Anybody think the Dems will refuse Corporate Donations?

Will the Democratic Party refuse corporate donations to the party?

I think they should.

Doubtless a (corporation-owned) media storm would follow, but they could use this as a soundboard to talk about income inequality in the US, and to promote a Constitutional Amendment to end corporation domination of the political system.

[baldguy]

105. The Reagan Revolution has never ended. It didn't even start with Reagan.

It's hard for us to believe it today, but between the '30s and the '60s the people actually liked and appreciated the fed govt. Starting in the '60s conservatives have been able to use the apparatus of the fed govt to turn the people's opinion against it and to create the circumstances which they claim to oppose - govt debt, high taxes, and inefficient & wasteful govt services.

And now, with the people suffering with the results of 30 yrs of conservative policies, conservatives are hoping to make things worse thinking that Obama will be blamed. The corporatocracy doesn't need to have Obama as their champion, they just need to have the people to remain distracted & ignorant.

OWS shows the opposite.

[SnoopDog]

106. I caught that too... and basically, Obama is a Nixon/Ford/Clinton Republican

If you don;t accept the truth, progress will never happen...

[Evergreen Emerald]

108. I disagree with Moore..but there is something going on...

I believe that we have not seen the worst of the economic down slide and the republicans know that there is nothing we can do to fix it--they are waiting four more years. By then, Americans will have forgotten that the Republicans put us in this mess, and Bush's name will have been rehabilitated.

I predict Jeb.

[citizen blues]

109. HE MISSES THE POINT AND SO DO YOU!

It's simple.

Remember Florida in the 2000 election? Remember Ohio in the 2004 election? Remember red-shifting?

Key states have been attacking voting rights - ALL YEAR!!!!!


So - what's the REAL reason the rich don't care about who the GOP nominee is?


THEY'VE BEEN BUSY PUTTING IN THE FIX TO RIG THE NEXT PRESIDENTIAL ELECTION.


2012 will be the year our democracy either survives or falls. The only chance we have is to overwhelm them in number.

[PDJane]

113. Nah, I got it. Look up. I know what they're doing;

They are busy rigging the game again.

[Hotler]

114. kicking n/t