It isn't THEM, it is us.

[debbierlus]

It isn't Barack Obama. Or, the one party Congress.

Or, the bought and paid for Supreme Court.

It is US.

There was just a primary in Massachusetts. There were two progressives running for the democratic seat and a DLC mushy middle candidate who won (Martha Coakley).

Ten percent of registered voters turned out to vote for this seat. Ted Kennedy's old seat.

Ten fucking percent.

The majority of people couldn't even be bothered to show up to vote.

I went to vote right after dinner (the busy time) and there wasn't one other person voting besides my husband. The place was full of volunteer poll workers. 25 of them. I literally cringed. I was so embarrassed for our country.

We have a TON of work to do. Emails and blogging are just extracurricular activities. The progressives have to get on the ground in their communities across the country and drag people by their ears to meetings. There are some groups in certain regions. Democracy for America...Progressive Democrats for America are good places to start. Check with them first. But, in a LOT of places, you may have to be the one to be the group leader and start a chapter. Yes, YOU.

People bitch and moan and complain we can't beat them because they are too big and they have all the money. But, you know what?
We haven't even BEGUN to fight. (The majority of the people, I know there are some on DU who are amazing activists, and for many years, and to each and every one of you, a sincere salute). We could completely wup their asses, if we only showed up and REFUSED to take their crap.

But, WE have to be the leaders. There is no savior coming. Barack isn't going to do it. Stop waiting for him to do it. Stop looking to the establishment to be any different then it has ALWAYS been.

Look in the mirror. You are it.

[Echo In Light]

1. Never underestimate the power of denial

The real fun hasn't even begun ...yet.

[leftstreet]

2. Where's the evidence that Congress gives a shit about us?

I know what you're trying to say here

:hi:

but...

maybe people have decided it doesn't matter who you vote in/out?

:shrug:

[debbierlus]

6. It happens at the primaries. This is where you get the candidates IN

Congress doesn't give a shit about us (for the most part).

But, if we became engaged, we could OWN the election process. Michael Moore is right.

When I showed up to the democratic meetings for our town, the people nearly fell over to have a new member!

10% voter turn out in MA for the primary? If progressives could get their shit together, we could have DICTATED the candidate just by getting our people out to the polls.

We have the numbers. We don't use them. We all sit alone and isolated behind our keyboards, not knowing that if we unite on the ground, we can transform the whole country.

[leftstreet]

18. We have to stop building movements based on politicians

a movement must be built on an idea

Single Payer is an excellent example - Americans are for it. How many 'primary' candidates come out in support of it?

Everyone bitches that Americans vote as if they're participating in American Idol, but that's exactly how the politicians and parties do it!

[debbierlus]

21. I agree. Movements are essential. Movements base on principle

Let the politicians come from those who lead these movements.

[leftstreet]

26. Hear, hear!

Let the politicians come from those who lead these movements.


:thumbsup:

[WhaTHellsgoingonhere]

74. I'll second that +1

[voc]

69. A movement built on an idea...

Isn't that what got us where we are now...ideology?

[MineralMan]

23. It's the same thing here in Minnesota, where the caucus

system is in effect. It's so obvious that a small group can control who gets nominated, clear up to the Statewide level. That's my deal for 2010. I attended my first caucuses in 2008, since I didn't move to MN until 2005. Next year, I'm going to own the precinct level caucus, which doesn't even have a chairperson any more. We couldn't even field a full slate of delegates to the next level, and that's in a precinct that votes about 72% Democratic.

The time is now, and 2010 is the year where we can make a real difference, by choosing progressive candidates in primaries, etc. If we fail, we lose the chance.

[NightWatcher]

25. you mean like Ned Lamont

Conn progressives got him the nom only to have Traitor Joe flip and run and win with Corporate backing. He stays in office and now the Dems fall all over themselves to kiss his holy ass in the hunt for the elusive 60.


The. System. Is. Broken.

Corporate Billions will win against the wishes of the people every damn day.

[hfojvt]

8. isn't that kinda self-fulfilling?

Like there's no difference between a Dennis Kucinich and a Joe Lieberman, so don't bother to vote in a primary and then Lieberman becomes Senator and then you complain "Lieberman/Coakley doesn't care about us".

[leftstreet]

10. How effective has Kucinich been?

Not bashing him here, but come on...

[Davis_X_Machina]

16. He commands a sizeable plurality, if not a majority, of people here....

...and just about nowhere else.

D(K)U is not a statistically normed cross-section of anything, especially the Democratic party, never mind the left...

[mmonk]

24. Effective enough to know where I stand.

Effective enough to question my future loyalty to this party. If I cannot change it, I cannot accept it because that means it changed me. How effective has Lieberman been? Very effective if you were in the neoconservative corner in the last 8 years. I share no value system with such a person. If the party shares the values of Lieberman then it doesn't share any of my values.

[debbierlus]

27. We need to elect MORE Kucinich type politicians. He is only one man

Marginalized and demeaned by the media and the 'centerists'.

Yet, he is always on the right side of the argument and always trying to fight for the people.

Elect a few more like him and see what happens. Can you imagine ten Kuciniches? Twenty?

Hundred?

They are out there. Amazing people with the insight and ethics.

[MineralMan]

34. Kucinich does a lot of good where he is. I don't think he's

electable as President, but there he is, serving in an important office. If we could replace a few other with candidates more like him, we'd not be discussing a 60-vote majority and making deals with creeps. Or...you can just give up.

[hfojvt]

47. he managed to get a majority of house Democrats

to vote against the IWR. But he's just an example showing the differences between progressive - blue dog - republican. In terms of 'they vote the way I want them to vote'. Yes, I think there is a meaningful difference.

[Davis_X_Machina]

57. He voted with Boehner and Bachmann and Co. against ACES...

...the House global warming bill. Again showing the difference between 'progressives' and Republicans -- none.

[hfojvt]

65. uh, yeah right. Except that one vote where they are the same

does NOT show that there is no difference. Unless you are some kind of fanatic about that one vote and are gonna ignore the other 500 votes when there was a difference.

[MineralMan]

17. If that is what they have decided, they have no voice, other

than mumbling on web sites. What on earth does that accomplish?

[HughMoran]

76. Hear! Hear!

:applaud:

[undeterred]

3. I find it hard to understand the lack of interest in voting.

But I remember a time when I did not always vote in primaries or pay enough attention to what was going on. So I guess a lot of people are just not paying attention.

[Rosa Luxemburg]

4. people are busy christmas shopping?

[HughMoran]

77. All day Tuesday?

I don't think that's a good excuse. If anything, if people are out of the house they have no reason not to stop by a polling station and VOTE!!

[closeupready]

5. We DID GOTV for Obama, and we got more war.

Tell me why that's worth our time, as liberals.

[debbierlus]

9. Obama was NEVER worth our time.

We need to actually elect REAL PROGRESSIVES.

Obama was my dead last choice for the Presidency outside of McCain. He never pretended to represent true progressive and liberal beliefs. He showed his cards during the Alito fight and the NSA spying vote in Congress.

The lesson is not to quit. The lesson is to STOP campaigning for the wrong people. And, it is IMPERATIVE we make our support CONTIGENT UPON REPRESENTATION.

[closeupready]

12. Ah! Okay. Got it.

I'm on board. :) K&R

[inna]

22. Thank you for this excellent (and important!) post!

KR

[quaker bill]

68. The question is can we?

You had two "real progressive" candidates in Mass. They both lost. Now, if there is a place in the US more hospitable to a "real progressive" candidate than Mass., it might or might not be Vermont on a given day. Conditions in Mass. are about as favorable as they get, and still, you report that they lost.

In short, here is what you get when you make your support "contingent upon representation", no representation. Here is the reason: when polled 20 percent of the country will call themselves "liberal or progressive" and 40+ percent of the country will call themselves "conservative". The fact that apparently "real progressives" cannot win in Mass. is only further proof. One might not like that it takes a coalition with moderates to win elections in this country, but that does not change facts.

The notion that one could discipline the Dems to run "real progressives" by withdrawl of support is absurd. The party is the collective expression of the group of people who support it, contribute to it, and attend the meetings. As "real progressives" withold support, the party will move to the center to reflect the views (a.k.a. "represent") of those left who support it. Parties seek reliable supporters not "contingent" supporters, simply because you cannot count on "contingent" supporters in a crunch.

I supported Barack Obama before the first Iowa primary ballot was cast. I did not support him because he was a "real progressive" as I never harbored such illusions. I supported him for the simple reason I gave to friends prior to the first ballot in the primaries being cast: "He will win the nomination and take the general election by 5 to 7 percent." I took a large number of friendly bets that day, and won quite a few cokes and lunches in the following months. I supported him because I was sure that he could and would win and bring a large enough number of other seats with him to put the republicans in the clear minority. Beleive what you will, but no one else running on the (d) side of the ticket had this capacity. Hillary might have won, but it would have been much closer and might have involved loss of the Senate. None of the rest stood better than 50:50 odds on a good day.

Getting elected is quite different than being "right" on the issues. The two things may happen at the same time on rare occasion, but they are decidedly not related. If they were in fact related, George W Bush would have found his highest calling as a day laborer on some construction site (not intended as an insult to day laborers).

I wish you all the luck in the world getting "real progressives" elected, we could certainly use some. That being said, I will not be holding my breath in anticipation. I am represented by Alan Grayson, but curiously, he did not run as a "real progressive". He ran against government waste, fraud, and abuse (in no-bid contracting). He had some great ads, very forceful, very brief. I have friends who helped produce them.

[ecstatic]

81. good luck. You seem kind of out of touch nt

[winyanstaz]

7. K & R....ty great post

[Matariki]

11. K&R - well said.

[nykym]

13. A+ Thank you debbierlus

I have been becoming more active in my later years after whining through most of my younger days until someone asked if I had voted? I said NO. They said, then shut up you really have no right to speak on the issue, you had a chance to do something and you blew it. Wake-up call!

[MineralMan]

14. Interesting. If only 10% of voters turned out, and the

DLC type won, that would seem to indicate that it wasn't the progressive voters who turned out. What could be the reason for this? Everyone knows that primaries are the one place where we can make a difference. The turnout's so low that a small group can influence the election far more than during the general election.

Are progressives not bothering to act on their beliefs? Is that the problem? If so, then all hope for elective anyone but moderates is gone. If the only thing progressives are doing is posting on DU and other sites, then the cause is surely lost.

Looks like who turned out were the folks who vote in every election, primary or general. The oldsters, like me, and others who seem to fit in the middle of things, rather than the edges.

A pity.

[anonymous171]

20. A lot of younger people have jobs.

[MineralMan]

29. I see. What time do the polls open and close? This OP is about

simply voting, for pete's sake. If you work you can't vote? Is that what you're saying? How silly.

There were progressive candidates in this primary. And yet, the moderate won. Why? Because people didn't bother to turn out.

Don't make excuses, please. You don't have to walk precincts, but you have to vote. If you don't vote, you don't matter one whit. You can write here all you want, but you don't matter if you don't turn out and cast your vote.

No excuses.

[old mark]

61. A lot of young people talk a good fight, but don't bother to show up.

Lazy motherfuckers.


mark

[debbierlus]

33. The progressives are floundering without leadership.

That is what this post is about...

Be the leadership.

The unseating of Howard Dean by the DLC was precisely BECAUSE he was providing leadership and on the ground strategy to elect real democrats.

We must use his formula and regroup.

[MineralMan]

42. Yes. Exactly. Which is why I will be the precinct chair following

the next caucus. My disgust is with those who call themselves progressives but do not even expend the effort required to vote in a primary election in their own freaking district. That is too sad to even comprehend.

[rockymountaindem]

15. That's right. I don't understand why so many people want to give up

instead of finding ways to utilize the process to achieve our goals. It seems to me like that would be the way to go about things; not to throw up our hands and complain until the "revolution" that some people around here think is just over the horizon. GOTV, being involved and getting people we know in our own lives INTERESTED in politics instead of turning them off with cynicism would probably produce better results.

But that seems like too much to ask for some people. And to those who say that the non-voting public has figured out that it doesn't matter who wins, I say most of them probably haven't given it any thought whatsoever. They aren't thinking about politics at all, for the most part. That's something we should be trying to fix.

[nicky187]

19. Concur. K&R

[ShortnFiery]

28. It's a lot of THEM too = the entire system is rigged as a right-wing corporate duopoly. eom

[Echo In Light]

31. +1

[SidDithers]

30. No. You've got it all wrong...

The Powers That Be™ wanted Coakley to win so they made everyone stay home, thus preventing the True Progressives™ from winning.

"THEY" control everything, you know.

Sid

Edit: in seriousness, rec'd for good post.

[debbierlus]

35. Love the Trademark symbol, very cute (and accurate)

[MineralMan]

36. Very good. I can hear the whiny mewling now...

"Weeeeelllll...there's no point in going and voting in this primary.....the fix is in.....I think I'll head over to the club and see if I can get laid.

If progressives can't bother to turn out to choose a candidate in Ted Kennedy's district, then I'm going to simply discount the entire progressive "movement," because it ain't moving...it's just talking.

This OP makes me very sad. Very sad, indeed.

[SidDithers]

50. Yup. The real enemy of refom is apathy...

not centrists, or DLC'ers, or even Republicans.

Sad is right.

Sid

[MineralMan]

54. Sometimes I fear that people mistake posting messages on

places like this for activism, instead of the simple intellectual exercise it actually is. Any of those who post here who do not, at the very least, vote in every election they can, is seriously delusional. Posting here makes no material difference in our representation in government. Only action can do that, and voting is the simplest of those actions. Those who cannot even be bothered with that tiny action deserve the bad government they get.

[Mass]

43. I wished I could recommend a post, Excellent

(red'd the OP too).

[AndyA]

32. I think poor turnout is partly due to the people we elect don't keep their promises.

So, people figure "why should I waste my time? They aren't going to do what they said they'd do anyway. They're all the same."

If you knew for certain people would do what they said they were going to do if they got elected, that would be a big motivator. But once elected, our representatives all too often aren't "representative" of all (unless you consider their corporate masters).

So I can see why people stop voting.

They shouldn't, of course, but I think a lot of people feel this way.

[MineralMan]

38. If people feel that way, then they deserve the lousy representation

they get. What they do not deserve is the right to whine about it later. If you don't turn out in the primaries, you are irrelevant to the process. It is that simple. If you're in a caucus state, the same applies if you don't show up to your precinct caucus and support a candidate you know will do the job. If you don't show up, then you can't complain about the namby-pamby one who gets the nod.

When I was in the USAF in the 1960s, stationed in Turkey, I even got absentee ballots for local elections, so I could vote for the school board members and the parks commissioner. How anyone can not vote when there is an opportunity, I do not understand.

My contempt for non-voters is without bounds.

[AndyA]

51. I agree, and I'm not defending non-voters, but I can see why many don't vote.

And there are some places, like here in Oklahoma, where you have to vote multiple times a year. They can't schedule everything just once or even twice a year, it's like 6 or 7 times a year, I kid you not.

Just this last Tuesday there was a school bond vote. Why it couldn't have been done in November with other things is beyond me. :shrug:

That also contributes to low turnout in this area, as people get tired of going to vote so often.

It's something they should embrace, but they take it for granted. We all suffer because of their foolishness.

[MineralMan]

55. And so? The fewer people who show up, the more power those who

do have. Why not seize that opportunity? I've never understood how that can be rationalized. It's like saying of a restaurant, "Nobody goes there. It's too busy."

So, if 10% of the eligible voters show up for a school bond election and vote for the bond, then they effectively tax the other 90%. Does that make any sense? If the only ones who show up are the ones who care about the election, then the ones who don't show up logically don't care. If they don't care, then I get to decide things for them.

Am I getting through here? So...there are lots of elections? How much time does it take to go and vote?

[AndyA]

62. Somewhere it seems this went off track somewhere.

Are you getting through to who?

I expressed an attitude regarding voting that has been mentioned to me.

I don't agree with that attitude, but I can understand the point of view. :shrug:

[polichick]

37. Wow, all those people lining the streets to say goodbye to Senator Kennedy...

...and so few showed up to make sure his seat went to the right person??

That really is shocking.

[MineralMan]

39. It's more than shocking. It's disgusting.

They deserve the lousy representation they get.

[berni_mccoy]

40. You are right. It is YOU. But not for the reasons you think.

[cali]

41. lol. look in the mirror? DUers are part of the 10% who vote

[MineralMan]

45. I wonder if they are, based on some of the posts I'm reading here.

I really do. How could a moderate goofus win if the progressives turned out to vote? I suspect that there are people in this thread who don't bother to vote in primary elections. I doubt they'll admit it, but I suspect they're here.

[pipi_k]

72. I do vote in primary elections

I couldn't this time because Mr Pip had surgery recently, and is still recovering and I can't leave him alone.

But...if I had been able to get out and vote, I would have been one of those idiots voting for that "moderate goofus", Martha Coakley.


So I guess I'm doubly loathsome.


My whole day is ruined now.

[AndrewP]

44. Agreed

[glitch]

46. Excellent post and thread. There is an incredible lot to do but on top of electing progressives

We need to make sure our election systems are fair and honest.

Making sure all the votes are openly and transparently counted MUST be a big part of our beginning to fight.

[alcibiades_mystery]

48. "Progressives" have a shitty message and a shittier attitude

People would fight tooth and claw to avoid going to progressive meetings, because such meetings generally suck. I know. I went to them for years. The Left is in a catastrophe of rhetorical failure. It is us, as you say, but not for the reasons you think.

You need only examine the postings of some of our better known "progressives" on this very board. Nobody who isn't 100% already in the tank wants to be around that kind of shit for more than 30 seconds. And people would be right to avoid our cringe-inducing proselytizers. Apathy and American Idol are much better uses of time than being lectured to by fundamentalists.

[pipi_k]

70. If you're saying what I think you're saying....

then thank you.

If I understand it correctly, thank you for exposing the shitty attitude of the "progressives", most of whom I find to be rather smug and more than a little obnoxious in their attitudes toward those of us who don't identify ourselves that way.

Like being a "Progressive" is the highest honor one could have...an ideal all should aspire to attain. The only "right" political attitude.

In a way it really IS like being lectured to by a bunch of cringe-inducing fundamentalists.


"Progressives" know what's good for everyone else, and anyone who doesn't think the same way is an idiot.



PS...and for anyone who's surprised or shocked that more people didn't get out to pick the correct successor for Teddy, put yourself in our shoes...we lost quite possibly the greatest Senator we ever had, and probably ever will have. Nobody could ever take his place. Had one of the candidates been a Kennedy, perhaps the turnout would have been bigger, but who knows. After Teddy, what's left? It's been four months. People might just as well chastise a grieving person for not running out and choosing their next spouse, for crissakes. Maybe people aren't ready to let go just yet. Nobody knows what's in the hearts and minds of someone else, but here is a whole thread devoted to bashing the people of Massachusetts: for either not voting, or for voting for the "wrong" person.

Honestly, it's getting to the point where I want to upchuck when I see someone proclaim to the world that s/he is a "Progressive" like being one is the only true path to Democratic Nirvana.

[HughMoran]

78. smug

I agree - let's turn off the smug and roll up our sleeves and get some work done. Those who have all the answers and can't compromise on anything need to learn that Dems don't march in lockstep. I didn't use the word "Progressive" as I am progressive on many issues and don't think the word should be soiled by the few "cringe-inducing" characters who think they OWN the word. Progressivism is NOT a rigid set of principals that everybody must adhere to. There are no loyalty pledges on the left. We are NOT the right! I'm sick of a few "fundamentalists" that think they speak for everybody - they speak for the LOUD MINORITY and they will bring the Democratic party down unless the vast majority of find a common voice. The rigid voice of the "Progressives" of which you speak is NOT the only true path to "Democratic Nirvana".

Excellent post BTW - I re-quoted you as I think you said it better than I could.

[blogslut]

49. Yep

The reason Barack Obama and the Dems won is because for once, voters showed up in record numbers. I'm sad to say that unfortunately, many of those voters will return to complacency, satisfied that they did their part for Democracy.

Vote, dammit.

[snooper2]

52. I guess this thread is a start....

.000129 percent of the population have viewed this thread :P


Better Idea would have Huffington post and other left leaning or Liberal sites start some kind of "grass roots" teabagger like movement. Have to admit they did get a lot of media coverage...

[spanone]

53. we are a lazy ass nation. we don't want to leave our lcd big screens.

it doesn't take a whole lot of people to influence an election when 10% of the voters show up. sad.

[MineralMan]

56. Sad, but a true opportunity for a minority, like progressives.

Given that apathy, that minority could actually get something done. But progressives are apathetic as well, it seems.

[amborin]

63. Marcuse spoke to this: passive totalitarianism

[LaydeeBug]

58. apathy is a bigger deterrent to democracy than any terrorist cell out there. nt

[Philosoraptor]

59. Damn straight debbierlus!!!

[old mark]

60. It's the same old Liberal/Progressive story - complain, protest,

demand, threaten, don't vote.
Begin all over again when the GOP wins.

It amazes me that people who are supposed to be the more intelligent side of American politics can be so self destructively fucking stupid time after time.

Republicans KNOW THIS, act on it and count on it. I saw an TV interview with a local (PA) GOP county chairman, who sstated that they always get the republicans out to vote in local elections, while Democrats never get many voters, and many of them split tickets voting for the "better" candidate.

Republicans tend to vote straight party tickets, therefore more of them get elected.

We have a lot of very smart, articulate, feeling, people in the Democratic party who just will not get off their lazy asses to vote for Democrats, no matter what.
Rec. great post - thank you.
mark

[HughMoran]

79. Another excellent post

What is with the self-destructive nature of the Democratic party? Even worse, the Republicans sucker Dems over and over again, and WE NEVER LEARN!!! It reminds me of Bart Simpson getting shocked when he does something bad, then does it again, and again, and again...

[mamaleah]

64. Very good points. It's really simple. Show up and vote!

Or I guess don't and just bitch and moan all day.

[Goldstein1984]

66. Pathetic! Ten Percent

"We the people" are the problem.

"We the people" are getting the government we deserve.

"We the people" are getting the government we tolerate.

I live in Alaska. Progressives in Alaska are accustomed to disappointment. But I don't know an Alaska Progressive who doesn't vote.

But I'm thinking that maybe a little more than just voting is called for. Maybe a little a little nonviolent but significant protest. If you have and opportunity to join such action, do it! If you can only support it financially, do it! I think there's a peace demonstration shaping up in D.C. for Spring 2010, and I plan to use my all-to-rare vacation time to attend. If not that, something else.

[PJPhreak]

67. I had an idea that I think just might work..

But I also think too many folk would be screaming Communism or Socialism or some such,but I'll throw it out there anyway...

1. Make Election Day a Federal holiday.

2 REQUIRE EVERYONE TO VOTE!

3.If you refuse to vote you can not register your automobile and your driving privilege will be revoked for that year,simple!

I'll probably get horribly flamed fer this idea....but you can bet yer ass it would work!

[pipi_k]

71. A few things to consider first....

You can force people to turn up at the polls, but you can't force them to vote. Not unless you want to have people standing there watching as they pull those levers, or, as they do in my town, make their little "x" with a pencil on the paper ballot.

And you can't stop people from choosing any old candidate out of resentment for having been forced to vote.

And what about people who can't get out and vote? What if someone has had recent surgery and cannot leave the house to vote?

Or what if someone has, for example, the swine flu....or some kind of emotional problem like anxiety disorder or depression or panic attacks...


Even if exemptions were made for people who are ill or recovering from surgery, etc., I still would not want to be at the voting mercy of people who, resentful at being forced to turn up at the polls, are voting for candidates they know nothing about, or, in extreme cases, writing names on the ballots like Mickey Mouse or Adolph Hitler or something.

[PJPhreak]

83. All very good points,

and ones I have considered and yes you right.

I don't have an answer other than to let people write in their votes under such circumstances My Gf of 27 years has an an anxiety disorder that is bad enough that she gets disability payments for it. And she still goes and votes. And yet she is terrified of a crowded store

But it isn't a right to vote,it is a responsibility,so how do we make sure that as Americans we carry out that responsibility? with only Ten percent of elegible voters turning out?

For the electoral process to really work,as many people as possible need to vote.

like I said,Its only an idea...But we must find a way to get people to vote.

I only used Driving Privileges as an example.

[sendero]

73. As usual..

... I agree with you 100%.

I think there is a complacency, a very deep rooted one, that has taken hold of Americans. Not just progressives, but almost everyone.

Maybe the grinding economic morass we are in will change that. I'm hopeful, but I just don't know.

[HughMoran]

75. Now we're talkin'

I agree with everything you've said. People need to stop bitching and moaning and hit the pavement and be the leaders of OUR future.

[OneBlueSky]

80. hate to say it, but in the eyes of some (if not most) people, it IS them . . .

and the reason they don't vote is that, at any level but the most superficial, they don't see a lick's worth of difference between "Them, Side A" and "Them, Side B" . . . two views of the same coin that (despite the handsome gentleman on the front and the majestic edifice on the back) is worth exactly the same amount no matter how you look at it . . . which, in most cases, is zilch . . .

now I'm not saying this is how I feel, mind you . . . but sometimes it's really hard not to . . .

[flyarm]

82. You are lucky ..your votes count..I refuse to vote again..since BOTH parties have stolen my votes!

In plain sight and no one anywhere in the country gave a rats damn!Nope..no one will get my vote, my money, my time and efforts..I am done!

Oh and i was an elected delegate in my state...and all those young folks that joined our DEC to vote and push Obama..they don't show up anymore ..but they have made it impossible for us to get a quorum vote in our local DEC..because they signed up and haven't shown up since the election!..so why bother..no one shows up anymore! nd the progressives and liberals..who were told to STFU by Rahm..well seems they have said fuck you back and they don't show up either..and the older women who were told to dry up and go away by the Obama young'uns..well they don't show up either ..

Wait till the next election..