interdictor: Voting is an admission that you are indeed a "Useful Idiot"

interdictor (

interdictor) wrote,
@ 2008-01-25 05:46:00

Voting is an admission that you are indeed a "Useful Idiot"
Photo surfaces of smiling Clintons with Tony Rezko... MORE... Clinton injected the indicted developer's name this week in heated debate with Obama: 'I was fighting against those ideas when you were practicing law and representing your contributor, Rezko, in his slum landlord business in inner city Chicago'... Clinton tells NBC 'TODAY' show on Friday: 'I probably have taken hundreds of thousands of pictures. I don't know the man. I wouldn't know him if he walked in the door'...

'I DON'T REMEMBER MEETING REZKO'

A politician is a person who would sell his or her own children into sex slavery for the chance to rule.

I understand casting a ballot in favor of or against an ordinance or tax or amendment to a constitution, but how can you not feel like a complete douchebag when you go into a voting booth and cast a vote for a politician. They are laughing at you. You are colluding in your own suckering. You are a "useful idiot". Just say no to voting, lest you demonstrate that you're the fool they take you to be.

If you vote, you have no justification to complain when you get screwed. You're complicit in this sinister and corrupt enterprise called government. You're validating it. You're an accomplice to deceit and theft and murder. Only those who refuse to take part in the system run by duplicitous, scheming hypocrites have cause to complain. Oh, I know -- your guy (or gal) is LESS BAD than theirs. Sure. You are a sucker.

(Post a new comment)

	redregon 2008-01-25 01:55 pm UTC (link)
	If she's lied about that, what else has she lied about? (Reply to this)(Thread)

	ikilled007 2008-01-25 01:58 pm UTC (link)
	What hasn't she lied about? For a politician, the act of telling the truth is just another tool in the toolbox, to be used when the strategist tells you it polled well with a focus group. (Reply to this)(Parent)

	crufix 2008-01-25 08:57 pm UTC (link)
	How do you not eventually lie to one out of 300 million people all of differing interests? I believe it is impossible. (Reply to this)(Parent)

	silkov 2008-01-28 10:18 pm UTC (link)
	:) good words (Reply to this)(Parent)

	snazzyokapi 2008-01-25 02:00 pm UTC (link)
	i'm totally with you on this, but here's the problem this runs us into: with the current system in place, what else can you do? it seems that even if you don't take part in the system, the system still takes a part of you... (Reply to this)(Thread)

	ikilled007 2008-01-25 02:06 pm UTC (link)
	That's true, but I'd rather make it clear that I know exactly what's going on and I'm not going to be party to my own suckering. It's not like participating in the system is going to improve your conditions. Clinton vs Dole? Bush vs Gore? Bush vs Kerry? And now what, Clinton or Obama vs Romney or McCain? That's Democracy? Fuck that noise. (Reply to this)(Parent)

	redregon 2008-01-25 03:08 pm UTC (link)
	revolt? isn't that what the gun-ammendment was made for? (Reply to this)(Parent)(Thread)

thevirtualjim
2008-01-25 05:39 pm UTC (link)

It was mainly made so that the states could defend themselves if the new federal government got out of hand. Also because the vast majority of people in the US hunted for food, and it was in contrast to the english where one had to be a noble to have a gun and/or hunt.

There IS a clause in the declaration of independence, and in one of the introductions to the bill of rights, that says the people have a right to alter and/or abolish a government if it is not doing what it should be.

(Reply to this)(Parent)

msrlapin
2008-01-25 02:26 pm UTC (link)

...or, of course, you could not vote, and let someone else make the choice for you.

Now THAT's being complicit with the system.

I quote Robert Heinlen (a man wiser than you, my friend):

"If you are part of a society that votes, then do so. There may be no candidates and no measures you want to vote for . . but there are certain to be ones you want to vote against. In case of doubt, vote against. By this rule you will rarely go wrong.”

“If this is too blind for your taste, consult some well-meaning fool (there is always one around) and ask his advice. Then vote the other way. This enables you to be a good citizen (if such is your wish) without spending the enormous amount of time on it that truly intelligent exercise of franchise requires.”

(Reply to this)(Thread)

	msrlapin 2008-01-25 02:28 pm UTC (link)
	If you are having trouble finding a well-meaning fool, let me point out that the New York Times endorsed Hillary Clinton and John McCain today. You're welcome. (Reply to this)(Parent)

	k_kinnison 2008-01-25 02:36 pm UTC (link)
	It is sad the american voting system ends up that you can only vote for two people to be president. (at least those two are the only ones who have a real chance of winning). Even then a popular vote still doesn't mean you have won less of two evils (Reply to this)(Thread)

	crufix 2008-01-25 08:56 pm UTC (link)
	that is the media's fault imo. there are always more than 2 candidates, but no mass media conglom-o gives them time where is the Green Party national debate for example (Reply to this)(Parent)(Thread)

	k_kinnison 2008-01-26 03:08 am UTC (link)
	I think the RNC and DNC are to fault to. They are the ones that only allow themselves to be on televised debates. Tho considering the results of the last presidential debates between Kerry and Bush, how Bush got OWNED, and the end results of the election; the only people who care about debates are politicians, and not the public at large (Reply to this)(Parent)

	montieth 2008-01-28 03:36 am UTC (link)
	The people don't vote for the president. The Electoral college does. It's a republic NOT a mobocracy. (Reply to this)(Parent)

eric_r
2008-01-31 07:03 am UTC (link)

well the problem with a system with more than two parties is the fact that the winner can win with such a small percentage of popular support. Take Italy for example: with so many political parties competing in the general election, the votes become so diluted that the 'winner' can have sometimes as little as 10% of the total vote.

I'll take the ills of a two-party system over the chance that an elected leader could have 90% of votes cast AGAINST him and still win.

(Reply to this)(Parent)

thevirtualjim
2008-01-25 05:19 pm UTC (link)

I would agree that our voting system is lacking, mainly in the fact that you have to be filthy rich, and have filthy rich supporters to have any chance at all at being elected, on a national (and often state) level at least.

The movie 'The candidate' is a great movie which shows how a politician can become corrupted just so he can win.

And it is true that for most people, the local elections are the ones that have the most impact on our lives, and those races TEND to be less dirty, and more 'normal' people are running. Yet those are the elections that barely anyone comes out for.

That being said, I think if your NOT voting, you are part of the problem. You would be surprised at how much state and federal politicians DO listen to their constituents (not as much as they should I think but they actually DO listen). I think if you aren't voting, you aren't participating in the most basic part of our system, and have no right to complain about whats happening (unless you plan to overthrow the system).

I find it amazing that in some countries where you can easily get killed for trying to vote, there are much higher % voters than in the US. I can easily see a slide over decades where US citizens lose interest so much in voting that bills get past to abolish voting for president, senators, etc. all together. There already seems to be a trend in HS and college students where they think we have too many civil liberties, and that blew my mind.

THAT would be a bad situation.

(Reply to this)

	crisper 2008-01-25 06:37 pm UTC (link)
	Okay, so you advocate government by not-voting.... You'd be one of those folks who believe in hereditary monarchy and divine right, then? (Reply to this)(Thread)

	ikilled007 2008-01-25 09:50 pm UTC (link)
	Hey, what you're doing is WORKING, don't let anyone tell you differently. (Reply to this)(Parent)

	megalanzero 2008-01-28 04:00 am UTC (link)
	Read Brain Droppings by George Carlin. He explains it as well and is funny about it to. Remember, there's more than two forms of government. There's a minimum 6. :P (Reply to this)(Parent)

kazriko
2008-01-25 07:19 pm UTC (link)

There is another way to protest other than not voting.

Vote third party. Look at what happened between 1992 and 1994. 1992, The republicans lost the presidency because of a third party candidate who advocated small government. In 1994, they came back with a platform of small government and won in the house.

Unfortunately, they forgot this after about 6 years in power. We need to remind both parties of this again.

(Reply to this)(Thread)

	right on censorshipdenied.wordpress.com 2008-04-22 10:30 pm UTC (link)
	Amen, I could not have said it better myself. (Reply to this)(Parent)

	greeklady 2008-01-25 08:09 pm UTC (link)
	I watched that quote this morning when she said it. I have to say, she does pose for a lot of pictures with strangers. Many people do in politics and in hollywood. That quote doesn't strike me as out of the ordinary. Slinging mud, that is bs. But that is another story. (Reply to this)

crufix
2008-01-25 08:50 pm UTC (link)

well I'd rather vote for the hypocrite I want than have a hypocrite steal the military and force himself into office, or have the government devolve into...what? kibble for the rest of the world to devour. Politicians by definition cannot be perfect people, they must compromise between completely opposite types of people, and that probably means unintentional lying.

My Voice is justified when I said "I voted for Kerry"-I absolve myself of all the bullshittery that has gone on with this "administration", but I know that living in a government where we have to compromise means that it is going to happen. I don't leave the country, and I don't refuse to vote just because someone says something or does something I don't like or agree with. I simply try to convince people that there is a better way to do it, and I support X candidate because that person is willing to do things I agree with.

If you don't like human nature (which is justified seeing what you've been through) then you can live with your happy escape. I'll keep voting.

(Reply to this)

	sonicblue 2008-01-25 09:34 pm UTC (link)
	I hate Hillary as much as the next guy, but who gives a shit, the Clintons probably photo-opped with thousands of random people off the street. I have friends who took pictures with them. Unless they took this photo at the Rezko Slum Landlord Non-Charity Non-Benefit to Fuck Poor People, I don't see how this is so damning. It's highly ironic and amusing, but not damning. (Reply to this)

sponng
2008-01-26 05:03 am UTC (link)

agreed system is corrupt and offers poor choice, but I subscribe to the Heinlein philosophy as well. It's a true power that is masked away from the people. Most elections are won by "votes against" it's why smear tactics WORK.

In the end, the only option is revolution... the problem is that in our society there is little substance to build any cohesive resistance. The PTB (powers that be) control most of the tools to change it (money, laws, and guns).

But that's all moot and academic.

The real question is..... WHAT DO YOU DO?

I think you are proposing that you do Nothing? Not Vote? I don't think that's the answer.

Others have proposed revolution. CHANGE is the dynamic of growth and evolution. There is nothing inherently wrong with change. Most of the great successes (for good or ill) are due to radical change of the status quo.

So whatcha gonna do?

(Reply to this)

	girl_tm 2008-01-27 03:36 am UTC (link)
	Great post! Thank you. Don't forget, you can always write in whoever you want when you go to cast your ballot. I've done it many times when I found the presidential choices to be a joke. It may not send a message singlehandedly, but if a lot of people did it (especially to vote for a fringe candidate), it would get noticed. Write-in votes DO count. (Reply to this)

(Reply from suspended user)

Mini Sitemap:

Username:		Create an Account Forgot your login? Login w/ OpenID
Password:
	Remember Me
	English • Español • Deutsch • Русский…