- Mar 29, 2004
Of all the god awful history you regurgitate in here every once in awhile you trip on a bit of truth. This is one of those very rare moments. Well put. (I cant believe I said that)Then what do you consider the starving of 500k to 1mn Iraqi children if not an act of war? What do you consider Clinton's air invasion of a country that was of no threat to Americans if not an act of war? Also, what am I making up? Just asking because Al Gore was another one of those pro-business, pro-war, pro-Federal Reserve Democrats. In fact, Clinton chose him as his running mate because of Gore being one of the most hawkish Democrats and more precisely because he voted for what lead to the Iraq War.
Ralph Nader believes Gore would've been exactly the same as Bush on foreign policy. Gore supported the Terrorism and Effective Death Penalty Act which was a violation of civil liberties. Nader didn't support it. At least Nader is honest, principled, and not a fucking idiotic, over-confident phony like Al Gore.
Craig is wrong about this, but it happens.
The corruption is far deeper then Craig lets on, he holds on to a few idealouges in DC as if they can save us. Really they are more of a abberation then our system balancing itself. (the US has ALWAYS been a dysfunctional mess)
Good people just do not make good politicians. The system itself is top heavy and cannot adapt as it is a relic of centuries past unable to resist mass media and the influence from inside of huge corporations that rival the size of whole countries back in the day.