This page has been archived and commenting is disabled.

Guest Post: The ‘Lesser Of Two Evils’ Con-Game

Tyler Durden's picture


Submitted by Brandon Smith from Alt-Market

The ‘Lesser Of Two Evils’ Con-Game

The moral relativism of the “lesser of two evils” philosophy has been draining the heart and soul of America for decades.  Many of us in the Liberty Movement understand that it is nothing new, and have come to expect the abusive and emaciated logic it entails from time to time.  However, over the course of the past year it has become apparent to me that the talking points and propaganda that drive the hypocritical worldview are being utilized on an even grander scale than ever before.  This fact struck me quite sharply while attending a local GOP Lincoln/Reagan dinner event while I was attempting to gauge the overall danger our country would be facing from potential RINO (Republican In Name Only) sellouts as well as what our hopes were for a possible political solution at the local and state level.  The “conservative” rally was, to say the least, disappointing.

One thing that stood out plainly at this event, though, was that there was an overall template; an action plan, a message that had been pre-engineered.  Someone had sent out a memo, or an email, or a guide, or perhaps beamed talking points directly into the cyborg brains of these political hacks.  Their rhetoric was repetitive and uniform and dry like elbow skin.  The demand was clearly stated; regardless of who won the Republican Primaries, no matter how unprincipled, how unconstitutional, how despicable, it was our “duty” as conservatives to back them through the national elections.  Obama and the Democrats had to be defeated at all costs…

Now, one of the first tenets or rules that a person learns when delving into the Liberty Movement is that there is no such thing as political parties in America today.  There are no conflicting interests in Washington D.C.  There is no “grand battle” between left and right for the minds of the masses.  It is a sham.  A con.  A fantasy.  A false paradigm.

In reality, the leaderships of both fraudulent parties support essentially the same methodology, and that methodology could be summarized thus:  Centralize everything, globalize everything, control everything, grow government power, reduce the effectiveness of the citizenry, turn the public against each other, rob them while they’re distracted.  If an American does not understand this dynamic and how it is used to dominate the ebb and flow of our culture, then that American knows nothing.  He is lost…

Sadly, even those of us who should very well know better than to fall into the false left/right paradigm trap do so on occasion, as has been made painfully obvious by the foolhardy actions of Rand Paul and his blank check endorsement of Mitt Romney.  Certainly, this epic blunder, which seems to me to be a blind stab at political maneuvering on the part of Ron Paul’s son, has set off an angry firestorm amongst true Constitutionalists who know every lie Mitt Romney has ever told.  People are using words like “betrayal”, and “traitor”, and with good reason, but let’s look at this calamity from the other side of things for a moment…

There are others out there who would applaud Rand Paul’s decision.  While many of them will openly admit that they do not feel very secure in the shadow of a Romney presidency, they still rationalize their position by making the “lesser of two evils” argument.  “America may be going off the edge of a cliff”, they say, “but at least Romney won’t press the gas peddle as hard as Obama”.  Here are just a few of the many reasons why this way of thinking will lead to the end of our society as we know it…

Lesser Of Two Evils?  There’s No Such Thing…

First of all, asserting that there is such a thing as a “lesser of two evils” is an act of naivety.  It relies on a very dangerous assumption; that one can somehow quantify which candidate is going to hurt the country less.  I’ve even read essays by people who pretend they can mathematically delineate the “more evil” of the evils!  Not surprisingly, their “logic” invariably leads them to proclaim the lesser evil to be the candidate of the party they happen to belong to.  Ignorant Republicans always see the Democrat as the greater evil, while ignorant Democrats always see the Republican as the ultimate monster.

Here’s some math for you:  there are two candidates for President of the United States, one is a cannibalistic serial killer who plans to murder 20 more people with his own hands while in office.  The other is a cannibalistic serial killer who only plans to kill 19 innocents personally.  Which candidate do you support?

The correct answer is NEITHER.

Unless you are a fan of murder, there is no inherent difference between these two demonic bureaucrats.  They both stand in opposition to the guiding principles of inborn conscience, as well as the protections provided by the laws of free people.  The fact that one man will do slightly less damage during his reign is irrelevant.  Is a choice between Stalin and Hitler, for instance, really a choice at all?  Which one is the "lesser evil" in this equation? 

Some may argue that this comparison is a bit over the top.  I beg to differ.  Presidents have the power not only to maim and kill en mass, but they also have the power to dismantle the laws which protect our civil liberties.  To drive the point home as far as Romney and Obama are concerned, let’s watch the following video, which removes the blinders and exposes these two charlatans for what they really are; two peas in a pod:

A refusal to vote, or a vote for a third party, is not a vote for Obama, or a vote for Romney, but a vote against the charade. 

There is no such thing as a “lesser evil”.  Either a candidate follows the path of truth and honor, or he does not.  If he does, he deserves our support.  If he does not, or if both candidates are criminals, then they both must be tossed to the wayside.  Just because the system has deliberately limited our choices does not mean we are required to participate in the flim-flam.

Participation Is A Duty?

I have also heard the argument that by refusing to participate within the system, and by refusing to choose a specimen from the carnival of horrors we are presented every election cycle, we are doing more harm to America than good.  This is the most prevalent falsehood of our era. 

The bottom line is, Americans have been dancing in the lesser of two evils pageantry for generations and our Constitutional shield has only been further degraded and destroyed in that time.  I defy anyone to show how choosing Obama over McCain, or Bush over Gore, or Clinton over Bush Sr. has helped this country or its people.  Where are these illusory advantages and benefits of participation?  Where has our country gone while the public fettered away years trying to decide which ghoul to hand over the scepter of empire to?  Or, the ultimate question; what specifically have they achieved?  Have they gained anything?  Has any minutia of our lives been made better by following the “lesser of two evils theory”?  Only a fool would claim yes…

One might argue that a non-vote is the same as putting all bad candidates on the same footing, and that this would be “wrong”.  I disagree.  In an election in which all candidates share the same disparaging policies, they are ALREADY on the same footing.  We simply refuse to give the farce legitimacy by casting our vote for any one of them. 

In the game of chess, the primary goal is to diminish your opponent’s options.  To force him into a corner where, no matter which choice he makes, he loses.  Chess, however, is not life.  In life, intelligent and creative individuals have the ability to walk away from the board completely and implement their own solutions.  The more we continue to participate in the rigged game, and the more we continue to view the future as a series of self contained boundaries administered by the establishment instead of a wide open frontier in which all is possible, the more we will lose, until there is nothing left.

Only Cowards Compromise In The Face Of Evil

Good does not compromise with evil.  As stated above, there is nothing to be gained by it.  I find that the people most prone to suggesting or demanding compromise with oligarchs and tyrants are usually cowards who have never faced down any legitimate struggle in their lives with any passion.  But, how do they sell this stunted philosophy to others?  The illusion here is one of “reason” or “objectivity”. 

Fearful men often use the guise of objectivity (even if they are not) to avoid confrontation, especially confrontation with a supposed authority figure or government.  Strangely, their powers of reason and deduction invariably seem to lead them to subservience to the establishment structure.  Compromise, for them, is a way to protect their flailing egos by playing the role of the “even handed citizen” while at the same time crawling towards servitude.

The argument to this position would, of course, be that many in the Liberty Movement compromise with evil everyday.  That we follow laws we disagree with and that we find reprehensible, and that this makes us somehow “hypocritical”.  I would say that this is a very narrow and disingenuous view.

Free minded people do not “follow” reprehensible laws so much as tolerate them while working to dismantle them (“following” infers acceptance).  Being honorable and generally of good will, we look for peaceful avenues of redress and change.  But, if those avenues are closed to us, and if the injustices expand, the free minded become freedom fighters.  Dissent and even revolution are inevitable in the face of tyranny.  It is an undeniable feature of human nature.

What I find most interesting though is the conundrum that this conflict of interest creates for the skeptical establishment slave.  If the Liberty Movement tolerates bad law while searching for a peaceful path towards change, they call us hypocritical.  If the Liberty Movement abandons tolerance and bring force to bear against tyranny and its abuse of the law, they call us “fringe extremists”.  Apparently, the only way we can be correct in the eyes of self proclaimed objectivists is if we bow to the constraints of the system, sit back, keep our mouths shut, and enjoy the bread and circuses. 

The Greatest Evil Is Moral Relativism

Collectivist governments seek to encourage extreme moral flexibility.  Totalitarian regimes cannot survive otherwise.  The lesser of two evils sales pitch is, in the end, an extension of the methodology of moral relativism.  It trains us to embrace the status quo, whether we like it or not, and to continuously rationalize our adherence to the sham just to get through the day.  The mental gymnastics we are required to perform become more complex and unstable.  Eventually, in order to ease our consciences which are screaming in agony at the pit of our chests, we have to stop caring about anything, and just go through the motions of participation. 

This is not the way to freedom. 

There are other ways to secure liberty beyond elections, but for these strategies to be effective, we have to stop asking for permission from the establishment before we take action.  Perhaps you seek to step outside the box and away from the controlled paradigm.  Perhaps you seek to confront the system head on, either exposing its duplicity and evil, or erasing it as an obstacle completely.  The system, its laws, and its political theater are of no consequence, especially when it has been so corrupted. 

Moral relativists, though keen on the idea of mutable law, enjoy the trappings of the law as long as it is to their benefit.  The law, as I have pointed out in the past, is arbitrary, and always has been.  The only true law is the law of inherent and universal conscience.  My conscience, as with most other people, tells me that choosing the “lesser of two evils” (an illogical abstraction) sends a message to the elitists that manipulate our culture that I am willing to help them perpetuate their fiction.  I become an accomplice in the crime.  I commit self mutilation.  I give power to the lie.

Such institutionalized misery can only be undone by uncompromising men and women who put principles and conscience before comfort, or even before their own lives.  All throughout history, this is how wrong is undone.  No society ever changed for the better by casting aside their beliefs and their individualism.  No society ever changed for the better by choosing the lesser of two evils.  No society ever changed for the better by holding out the hand of friendship to despots, maniacs, and con-men in the hopes that they would be spared just a little less tragedy before their time on this Earth is over…


- advertisements -

Comment viewing options

Select your preferred way to display the comments and click "Save settings" to activate your changes.
Tue, 06/12/2012 - 10:31 | 2517845 SilverTree
SilverTree's picture

Necessary evil.



Kirkpatrick Doctrine

Tue, 06/12/2012 - 10:31 | 2517851 Deo vindice
Deo vindice's picture

When your choice is between two evils, choose neither.

Tue, 06/12/2012 - 10:38 | 2517878 Axenolith
Axenolith's picture

No, when there's a choice between two evils while you wait for the crap to hit the fan, you pick the one that lets you keep more of your shit and doesn't try to disarm you.  Easy choice.  

Tue, 06/12/2012 - 10:39 | 2517887 dwdollar
dwdollar's picture

Just because elections are held doesn't mean you live in a democracy or republic.

Tue, 06/12/2012 - 10:45 | 2517897 Pladizow
Pladizow's picture

Pepsi vs. Coke - Different Cans, same shit inside!

"If voting changed anything, they would make it illegal." - Emma Goldman

Tue, 06/12/2012 - 10:46 | 2517906 francis_sawyer
francis_sawyer's picture

I'm still writing in Ron Paul (as I did in '08)...

Tue, 06/12/2012 - 10:54 | 2517953 Fish Gone Bad
Fish Gone Bad's picture

... goodness knows the wickeds' lives are lonely.  ... goodness knows the wicked die alone.

Might be time to brush up on Wicked.

Tue, 06/12/2012 - 11:08 | 2518013 Chief KnocAHoma
Chief KnocAHoma's picture

Hey dip shit... did you ever think that not voting is exactly the outcome tptb want. The masses not voting insures tptb will be able to manipulate the outcome. Not voting insures that the lobyist will have reign over Washington. Not voting puts us one step closer to full on enslavement.

By all means, don't vote! Watch American Idol or the NBA, NFL, Kardahian Sluts, that Madonna whore, or just go to a bar and slurp up some numb poison. But whatever you do, don't vote!


Tue, 06/12/2012 - 11:15 | 2518029 strannick
strannick's picture

Meet the Mormon boss, same as the Afro-American boss...

Tue, 06/12/2012 - 11:16 | 2518061 Abitdodgie
Abitdodgie's picture

Should I vote for Mr Black or Mr White , thats the only differance right .

Tue, 06/12/2012 - 11:42 | 2518128 whstlblwr
whstlblwr's picture

Anybody been watching over at DailyPaul. CIA is rounding them up. I guess it's what happens when you let users have control of content. But it's fucking scary how easy those guys follow the wrong ones. Shit. They are collecting names, one by one. Not sure for what. Maybe so when we run for office they can try to smear our names.

The way for us to get rid of Blue Red is to take it over. And that's what we're doing. Running for local elections.

Tue, 06/12/2012 - 11:43 | 2518188 Leopold B. Scotch
Leopold B. Scotch's picture

I prefer the lesser of two weevils.

Tue, 06/12/2012 - 12:55 | 2518463 FEDbuster
FEDbuster's picture

Obamney won't be getting my vote.  Since Ron Paul seems to be out, I'll vote Gary Johnson, Libertarian.


h/t to my 16 yr. old son for "Obamney"  BTW has anyone ever seen a Romney bumpersticker? 

Tue, 06/12/2012 - 14:40 | 2518886 Michael
Michael's picture

I will vote for Obama if it looks like Romney is going to win instead of writing in Ron Paul like I did the last time.

I research all incumbents up for re-election on the ballet and vote against all of them too and try to get them out in the primaries.

Tue, 06/12/2012 - 17:47 | 2519681 TrainWreck1
TrainWreck1's picture

Job #1 is kicking out Obama in 2012.

Job #2 is kicking out Romney in 2016.

Using the analogy in the article: One is a proven cannibal, the other is a potential cannibal.

The proven cannibal's team is painting the potential cannibal as 'no different' in order to disenfranchise the potential cannibals' supporters.

Want proof? Here ya go:


For those that don't know, the Washington Post, (Obama's staunch supporter) is the publisher of Foreign Policy

Only one reason they are claiming Romney = Obama. It sure as hell will not change any Obama votes, but it damn well may erode Romney votes.


So work on the Senatorial & Congressional elections, where there are battles to be fought, and punt the Kenyan back to the windbag city. Then get to work on a better option for 2016.

No, it's not perfect, but life isn't. Gotta play the hand we are dealt. C'est la vie.





Tue, 06/12/2012 - 11:31 | 2518124 Doubleguns
Doubleguns's picture

arsenic or strychnine which do you prefer. Yes you will die.

Tue, 06/12/2012 - 12:01 | 2518286 FeralSerf
FeralSerf's picture

Arsenic is allegedly sweeter.

Tue, 06/12/2012 - 13:56 | 2518691 Grinder74
Grinder74's picture

Uh, the 1st Black President is also the 44th White President.

Tue, 06/12/2012 - 14:16 | 2518790 OpenThePodBayDoorHAL
OpenThePodBayDoorHAL's picture

why do I have to be Mr. Pink?


Tue, 06/12/2012 - 11:23 | 2518090 redpill
redpill's picture

Dude please, the preferred term is Basketball-American.

Tue, 06/12/2012 - 20:45 | 2520058 TheFourthStooge-ing
TheFourthStooge-ing's picture

Basketball jones,
I gotta basketball jones,
I gotta basketball jones,
Oh baby oooooh oooooh oooooh.....

Wed, 06/13/2012 - 08:38 | 2519037 Chief KnocAHoma
Chief KnocAHoma's picture

IDIOTS!!!! Disenfranchisement is their intended outcome. But there is some positive energy here, because if you aren't smart enough to recognize this, maybe you shouldn't be allowed vote.

If you can not recognize this, you are most likely sucking the government teat anyway. So blast off!

And another thing... voting in local elections may be even more important because the country has to change directions at the street level first.

Tue, 06/12/2012 - 11:17 | 2518046 i-dog
i-dog's picture


"not voting insures tptb will be able to manipulate the outcome"

You're not paying attention!!! 

They've already manipulated their own two choices into place (and sidelined another alternative) to ensure that they get what they want ... no matter how you vote. Diebold will clear up any last minute anomalies.

Tue, 06/12/2012 - 12:37 | 2518409 jus_lite_reading
jus_lite_reading's picture

The criminal enterprises of Whore Street have already bought and sold the two candidates they want. At this point, you might as well vote for your aunt Mitilda. It's game over. Too many people know about the scam. They know the US is corrupt and vile. They know the "stock markets" are a giant ponzi scheme designed for the insiders to get rich. They know the thought of the US being a democracy is a total joke. 

Just as Monsatan has its "former members" sitting on the boards at the FDA and USDA, the Morgue has its "former members" working for the Obaney team(s). 

You ain't seen nuttin yet!! The truth is getting out...


Wed, 06/13/2012 - 00:40 | 2520455 monad
monad's picture

bought 535 Manchurians.

Wed, 06/13/2012 - 08:47 | 2520989 Chief KnocAHoma
Chief KnocAHoma's picture

No Dog, you're not paying attention... I am not arguing that candidates are weeded out by powerful forces. Believe me when I tell you I KNOW THIS, up close and personally.

But not voting is not the answer. Vote, voice your opinion, and most importantly, do this on the local level. 

Tptb can not influence every house member in DC. Not enough time, or manpower. Lobyist can knock on your reps door after he sets up office, but this is why you need to get involved in the process, not run from it.

Try to get to know your rep before pulling the lever. Ask them, if given the opportunity, what lobby they will take money from. Then hold them accountable if it turns out differently.

Don't run from the process, get involved in it.


Tue, 06/12/2012 - 11:49 | 2518217 tamboo
Tue, 06/12/2012 - 11:12 | 2518031 NotApplicable
NotApplicable's picture


Besides, we're nearing a century of government by the banksters, of the banksters, for the banksters.

Voting to support the "Coup of '13" is TREASON, if you were say, a strict constitutalist.

Tue, 06/12/2012 - 11:27 | 2518105 koaj
koaj's picture

you're actually better off voting Gary Johnson if Ron Paul is not the GOP nominee...a write in vote goes in the garbage and is never even counted

Tue, 06/12/2012 - 13:35 | 2518618 mr_T
mr_T's picture

    Btw.. Ron Rand Paul sold out to Mitt....

Tue, 06/12/2012 - 10:49 | 2517913 Bob
Bob's picture

Peirs Morgan had Jesse Ventura on CNN for a good half hour last night.  It's the first time I've ever heard somebody with comprehensive "unapproved" views given that much time on CNN.  Morgan had a hatchet job in mind, but Jesse comfortably ate his lunch.  Hell, he cleaned out his entire pantry.  Great show.

Jesse has no more love of Rmoney than Barry O. 

Tue, 06/12/2012 - 10:54 | 2517952 kralizec
kralizec's picture

Jesse is a boob.  He was a joke as a governor and would not be elected if not for the "My Governor can beat up your Governor" bumperstickers so popular in the trailer parks.

Tue, 06/12/2012 - 11:09 | 2518007 Bob
Bob's picture

I'm not pushing for him as Prez, but he has a pretty simple criticism of the blue/red game: Eliminate "straight ticket" voting by which ballots are organized by red/blue categories which require voters to know nothing about the actual candidates or their platforms while pushing those two parties to "featured product" status and relegating competing parties to "fine print" status on ballots. 

Just look at the physical ballots and you can see that red/blue is set up to dominate. 

His new book is Rebloodlicans and Democrips: Getting the Gangs Out of Washington,iirc. 

He says he can't get on Fox or MSNBC (though I suspect Ratigan will take up that challenge.)  Likewise for the broadcast networks, of course.

Tue, 06/12/2012 - 11:25 | 2518099 kralizec
kralizec's picture

It's a false argument to say red=blue.  The democrats have been hijacked by the far-left socialists, the GOP is dominated by mushy-headed moderates, RINOs whatever you want to call them.  The Tea Party has the right idea, convert the GOP from within and make them more conservative and liberty conscience.  Who attacked the Tea Party candidates?  Rove and the rest of the moderate punks.  To say red=blue means admitting Ron Paul is living a lie, why else does he run as a GOP candidate?  Why does he participate in such an unholy alliance willingly?  Converting the GOP for within makes sense.  Having a tantrum and staying home is childish, as is saying red=blue in all things.

Tue, 06/12/2012 - 11:54 | 2518252 Bob
Bob's picture

Just close your eyes and believe?

Tue, 06/12/2012 - 12:08 | 2518317 takinthehighway
takinthehighway's picture

"There's no place like home...there's no place like home..."

Tue, 06/12/2012 - 13:06 | 2518415 Bob
Bob's picture

I picture a paddle with a ball connected by a rubber band.  The "parties" take turns playing each role, knocking one another back and forth.  We're supposed to pretend that between them they embody the entire universe of valid possibilities and that the process is inherently productive.  Apparently, it's the only game that exists and for good reason.

When two parties dominate any market it is by definition an oligopoly. 

I don't think this is what the Founding Fathers had in mind.  There aren't too many modern theorists who see it as a good idea, either. 

Find any domocracies set up in the last hundred years who practice such a system. 

Tue, 06/12/2012 - 15:49 | 2519184 JB
JB's picture

Last time I checked, Ron Paul was the chair off the House Finance Committee... You do the math. ;)

Tue, 06/12/2012 - 11:52 | 2518233 AnAnonymous
AnAnonymous's picture

His new book is Rebloodlicans and Democrips: Getting the Gangs Out of Washington,iirc.


Title of interest. Nice analogy.

Tue, 06/12/2012 - 10:57 | 2517949 Cognitive Dissonance
Cognitive Dissonance's picture

"Pepsi vs. Coke - Different Cans, same shit inside!"

Yeah. But my shit tastes better than yours.

The ultimate control used by the control system, one that we all embody to some degree or another (even those who insist they are divorced from the control system) is the false paradigm of duality, of right or wrong, black or white, better or worse, good or evil, left or right.

The real world consists of a million shades of gray. Seeing the false reality through the lens of duality has the same effect upon us as wearing blinders and a restrictive neck brace.

Tue, 06/12/2012 - 11:04 | 2518001 Gully Foyle
Gully Foyle's picture

Cognitive Dissonance


Everything is.

It's how we choose to interpret the world that fucks us up.

Be here now is all that matters.

Tue, 06/12/2012 - 11:12 | 2518037 Cognitive Dissonance
Cognitive Dissonance's picture

I beg to differ. Everything is not a yes/no choice. The false paradigm, the present consensus reality/illusion, has conditioned us to interpret the world in this way.

Once we grow weary of pounding on the closed door in front of us, a door previously open, and look around us with truly open eyes (by first looking deeply within) we discover that there are dozens, even hundreds, of doors and choices all around us. This is the first step to regaining our true inner sovereignty.

Tue, 06/12/2012 - 11:21 | 2518080 MilleniumJane
MilleniumJane's picture

So true, but I find myself standing still wondering which door to choose.  Still struggling with the programmed slave mentality...

Tue, 06/12/2012 - 11:57 | 2518250 Cognitive Dissonance
Cognitive Dissonance's picture

As do I.

I am finding that the key is to practice the mental/emotional/physical shift that's required to be a true sovereign. In other words, fake it until you make it. If you think about it, all our (not just physical) actions require some fore thought prior to the actual act. Routine actions need little to no imagination while new actions require almost all imagination. Engage the imagination reactor. "Play" with the concept first, then take a few baby steps and see what you find. You will be surprised what will come out once you fire up your inner knowing.  

Being sovereign, or should I say becoming sovereign, is not something you just turn on and "be", but rather something that is learned over time and with much trial and error. It is mostly about being 100% responsible for what you are, do and feel and being centered, being settled, with the decision to do so. 

I'm trying to put together an article on this concept and quite frankly I'm struggling. I am finding it difficult to find the proper words to describe a state of mind, body and spirit.

Tue, 06/12/2012 - 13:07 | 2518517 JimBowie1958
JimBowie1958's picture

We cannot set up false dichotomies to chose from, instead we must take every means available to change the system. We must subvert each institution to our oals where we can and neutralize those we cannot. We must also work within the parties and outside of them too, and prepare alternatives if our will continues to be ignored.

Our problems start with our division, lack of common values and an opponent who is the best ever known at decieving the masses with false choices and creating common notions that are to their interests, like the Romney bots claim early on that his nomination was inevitable. It only became inevitabel because GOP leaders in the TPM  fell for the lesser of two evils lie and thought that they could bargain with the Devil.

Tue, 06/12/2012 - 14:50 | 2518945 LooseLee
LooseLee's picture

Have a look at the writings of Jiddu Krishnamurti, the Indian author and 'Spiritual Guide'.......

Tue, 06/12/2012 - 13:01 | 2518491 JimBowie1958
JimBowie1958's picture

So true, but I find myself standing still wondering which door to choose. 

It doesnt matter at the moment because all doors lead to the same place: serfdom.

We are going to have to make our own godamed door to where we want it to go to - freedom and prosperity.

With the coming tech revolution we will have a utopia of ease and plentifulness *IF* we can make the bastards share it with all of us.

Tue, 06/12/2012 - 12:03 | 2518292 Ricky Bobby
Ricky Bobby's picture

Zombie Troll Alert. Remember Gully it is Doubletap for Zombies.

Tue, 06/12/2012 - 10:46 | 2517905 DeadFred
DeadFred's picture

The Soviet Union had regular elections giving the people a choice of which candidate they wanted to abuse them. Their voter turnout was better too.

Tue, 06/12/2012 - 10:48 | 2517917 francis_sawyer
Tue, 06/12/2012 - 11:00 | 2517984 Cognitive Dissonance
Cognitive Dissonance's picture

I used to go with the wrench.

Why the wrench?

Because......fuck him.....that's why.

I (love) Good Will Hunting.

Tue, 06/12/2012 - 11:10 | 2518021 BandGap
BandGap's picture


Think back to a time when the candidates "views" started to coalesce. The first I can remember is the 1992 election when Clinton got in.....about two years into his presidency there was the Newt Gingrich Contract With America bullshit. The Bill found his "center".  After that point I just started seeing them as more or less the same. Some slight differences but not really. Bush handed out money in 2001 as "stimulus", Bush actually said 'we have to suspend capitalism to save capitalism' or whatever. Then the SOB let them have the reins for Freddie/Fannie....

Soetoro is just a puppet used for the greater goal. Romney will win, the other side will be appeased, he'll piss off the left on some bullshit social issue and things will keep on keeping on in the same direction. 

Tue, 06/12/2012 - 11:31 | 2518130 giggler123
giggler123's picture

... and the GDR STASI had similar practices for detaining, interrogating and spying on their humble voters.

Tue, 06/12/2012 - 12:07 | 2518309 Malachi Constant
Malachi Constant's picture

The Soviet Union perfected their voting system way, way beyond what the poor confused West can only dream of: they had 1 (one) candidate to choose from.

Tue, 06/12/2012 - 13:19 | 2518551 Clashfan
Clashfan's picture

No, they had several candidates from the same party. The voters had choice of candidates but not of party. Here, effectively, we have the same thing. Now do your duty: Go out and vote!

Wave them flagz and wag them bagz!

Tue, 06/12/2012 - 11:27 | 2518106 myshadow
myshadow's picture

no matter who you vote for the government always gets in.

Tue, 06/12/2012 - 10:48 | 2517915 bobnoxy
bobnoxy's picture

That's the same nonsense they said about Obama the last time, and gun sales soared after he got elected. There has never been more guns in America than today. Don't you have anything that isn't pure crap to hammer him with?

Tue, 06/12/2012 - 10:58 | 2517975 Axenolith
Axenolith's picture

That's just stupid, they're waiting for lame duck term.  His agenda is for total removal of the 2nd, their early agenda (reinstatement of AWB and more handgun controls IIRC) was on the WH webpage until it started drawing fire shortly after he was elected.  However many there are, or get bought in a cycle doesn't mean shit.  Hell, if they announce they're banning them all in a year, sales would spike, and then there'd be a few million idiots griping that the government was only reimbursing them 10 cents on the dollar for them when they took them (as opposed to giving them to the collector 1 bullet at a time).

Tue, 06/12/2012 - 11:09 | 2518019 Ima anal sphincter
Ima anal sphincter's picture

They aren't going to take our guns. They can pass all the legislation they want, but the American people will tell them to shove it up their ass. My government is totally corrupt. I don't give a shit what they say.

Pass all the laws you want. Come for them, PLEASE!!!

Tue, 06/12/2012 - 12:06 | 2518305 XitSam
XitSam's picture

Anal Sphincter, I suggest you read Enemies Foreign and Domestic by Matthew Bracken. Oh, you'll get in a few licks, but if you think all it takes is fire in your eye and a righteous cause you'd be sadly mistaken.

Tue, 06/12/2012 - 12:40 | 2518417 Ima anal sphincter
Ima anal sphincter's picture can kick back and let it happen. I won't be.

The government wants passive pussy's. I see more swinging dicks every day. I suggest you grow a set.

50+ million pissed-off Americans with guns will have their say.

Tue, 06/12/2012 - 14:02 | 2518713 XitSam
XitSam's picture

Fuck you, asshole. You're the one talking shit. So what are you going to do? Come on, tell us. 

Tue, 06/12/2012 - 14:53 | 2518919 Ima anal sphincter
Ima anal sphincter's picture

Fuck you asshole

I am an asshole. Your words don't phase me. I'll speak my mind and I don't care who I piss off.

I served "My Country". Did you??????

I've watched my "our" country be taken over and destoyed by banker assholes. The day is coming when they'll get their due. I  don't care if you sit. There will be PLENTY who will not.

Keep "pushing" us Mr Government.......the springback is going to be hell.

Tue, 06/12/2012 - 15:04 | 2519018 XitSam
XitSam's picture

I served. If you're so brave and all fired up why are you waiting? Quit talking shit. By your own admission, you sat by and watched the country "be taken over and destroyed". Sounds to me like you're the pussy.

Tue, 06/12/2012 - 15:32 | 2519103 Ima anal sphincter
Ima anal sphincter's picture

I'll commend you for serving.

Is one man going to straighten this thing out? Sure, I can go off the deep end and start wasting people. Will that solve ANYTHING????

This is going to take a whole bunch of us. I do not wish for violence, it is the threat of it that is the key. If enough American's said "enough is enough" and took action by marching on DC with guns (not signs), I would think the PTB might get the message. Hell.....they would run like the rats that they are. Then "WE" can put this thing back together.

I'm running out of years. I want the best for my kids. They shouldn't have to fight my battles or suffer from my inaction.

I'm ready.......nobody else is.

Tue, 06/12/2012 - 12:49 | 2518456 ejmoosa
ejmoosa's picture

That's an awesome series of books by Matt Bracken.  But I think you misunderstood the message.


Tue, 06/12/2012 - 13:29 | 2518592 JimBowie1958
JimBowie1958's picture

Dude, there are so many armed Americans that if we each only manage to kill one godamed gun-grabbing Nazi jackboot before we check out then we win as our surviving family and neighbors will gain.

Tue, 06/12/2012 - 14:58 | 2518996 XitSam
XitSam's picture

How are you going to resist drone surveillance? Lucky that Gorgon-Stare crapped out so they won't see everything all the time. And how will you kill the Nazi jackboot when he throws some indirect fire on your location? Did you think that your family or your innocent neighbors wouldn't be threatened to ensure your compliance? Do you think that new technology won't be used?  If you fight the last war, you'll lose.

Tue, 06/12/2012 - 17:22 | 2519601 Overfed
Overfed's picture

All of that awesome amazing technology and they still can't make the Mujahadeen cry uncle!

Tue, 06/12/2012 - 13:32 | 2518605 CH1
CH1's picture

if you think all it takes is fire in your eye and a righteous cause you'd be sadly mistaken.

What it takes is ACTION, not talk.

Tue, 06/12/2012 - 13:54 | 2518683 Abiotic Oil
Abiotic Oil's picture

Uhhh, you need to read the rest of the books.

Ranya Bardiwell and Phil Carson live "happily ever after", after getting in some serious licks.

Tue, 06/12/2012 - 14:39 | 2518894 XitSam
XitSam's picture

I read the trilogy. They personally, and the country, got very very lucky, after all it is fiction and the good guys are supposed to win. But suppose the massacre site had not been discovered and documented in the third book do you think things might have turned out differently? Had the southwest been restored? This is reality, and the good guys don't always win.

There's too many people locked into what they imagine will happen and ignoring what could happen.  If anal sphincter and his 50 million buddies were as gung ho about defending the country as he claims, we would not be in this position now.

Tue, 06/12/2012 - 14:47 | 2518932 Ima anal sphincter
Ima anal sphincter's picture


Tue, 06/12/2012 - 15:06 | 2519027 XitSam
XitSam's picture

Can't you even come up with a new insult?

Tue, 06/12/2012 - 15:30 | 2519107 Ima anal sphincter
Ima anal sphincter's picture

Tried to delete it.

Tue, 06/12/2012 - 11:16 | 2518059 bobnoxy
bobnoxy's picture

Same argument as last time, rehashed for 2012. Scaring stupid white people works for Republicans, so they keep doing it.

Tue, 06/12/2012 - 13:48 | 2518665 Abiotic Oil
Abiotic Oil's picture

You do realize that the only reason that Holder and Obama haven't been indicted as accessories to murder for their proven (via email trail) involvement in Gun Walker/Fast & Furious is that no one has the balls to prosecute?  

Since it is hard to read the news when screaming "Yes We Can" over and over... Gun Walker/Fast & Furious was Obama's "under the radar" plan to make it appear the US was really supplying the Mexi cartels with weapons, thus demonzing the 2a, thus paving the way for rolling the 2a back with extensive "common sense" gun control laws.

If YOU were caught smuggling weapons to a foreign country, the only problem the administration would have would be determining whether it would be easier to smoke you in your living room with a Predator Drone missile strike or use the NDAA to indefinitely detain you without recourse and enjoy your slow death via torture.


Tue, 06/12/2012 - 13:56 | 2518689 bobnoxy
bobnoxy's picture

So I'm guessing you voted for that intellectual giant Bush, who simply lost tens of thousands of guns in Iraq, some of which got turned on OUR guys there? And who didn't have the balls to go after that incompetence?

Look, I get it. Either the RNC sent a bunch of you douchebags in here to try to shape the mssage, or you all hate Democrats, liberals and Obama and if lying is all you have, that's fine.

I really get that. But either make some fucking sense, or find something else to do. Maybe play with your ham radios, I don't know, whatever it is that you do.

Tue, 06/12/2012 - 14:24 | 2518826 Abiotic Oil
Abiotic Oil's picture

Did not vote for H.W., Clinton, W., Gore or Kerry.  They are simply the hired help.  You don't get it.  It's like a Dr. Suess book - Red Team, Blue Team, all the same team.

Provide a link to prove this:

"lost tens of thousands of guns in Iraq, some of which got turned on OUR guys there"

Can I offer a guess that you are a product of the Government School System?

Tue, 06/12/2012 - 14:32 | 2518862 bobnoxy
bobnoxy's picture

Have you ever heard of Google, Dumb Ass? This took about 20 seconds. Here's more than one link;

Just because you're ignorant doesn't mean this didn't happen. I know, it's all left wing fiction meant to make Bush look bad, right? I could see that coming.

Forget where I went to school. I can think my way out of a fucking paper bag! Honest to Christ, what's wrong with you anyway?

Tue, 06/12/2012 - 13:49 | 2518668 Bob
Bob's picture

Same psychodrama the Dims are trying to run on liberals, fwiw. 

Tue, 06/12/2012 - 13:40 | 2518628 bobnoxy
bobnoxy's picture

They're waiting for a lame duck term? That's it, your argument? Maybe Obama won't have to run for re-election, but Congress will, and Obama will have about as much luck corraling the Democrats as FDR did in his second term. Less even, since FDR had a backbone. Do you really think members of Congress will try to ''take your guns away''? That's just naive at best, and flat stupid at worst.

And somewhere, the NRA and the gun makers are laughing all the way to their daily Brinks truck drop off.

Tue, 06/12/2012 - 14:02 | 2518716 Abiotic Oil
Abiotic Oil's picture

Obama (in his role as puppet, just like W. and Clinton) has made it very clear (through his illegal actions in Libya, etc.), that he "doesn't even need to get to the Constitutional issue" when issuing forth dictate.  Executive Signing Statements are all he needs.

Don't you have an SEIU meeting to go to or something?


Tue, 06/12/2012 - 14:07 | 2518740 bobnoxy
bobnoxy's picture

Oh, thank you for bringing me back to the good old days of Bush and ''the Constitution is just a piece of paper''! The illegal wiretaps, searching our medical records and library records too. Yep, that's all in the Constitution too!

Bush still holds the all-time record for signing statements, so as usual, I'm missing your point.

Do you have any idea how obvious you are? Do you have an RNC or Young Republicans meeting to attend?

Tue, 06/12/2012 - 14:36 | 2518882 Abiotic Oil
Abiotic Oil's picture

You just made my point for me.

The signing statements continue, the agenda continues, the spending continues and liberty is eroded... no matter who the hired help is.

Which is the point of the author's article... Vote Obomney 2012!

Tue, 06/12/2012 - 14:46 | 2518928 bobnoxy
bobnoxy's picture

You never had a point. You and your RNC buddies are simply trying to slime Obama with fact, or most often, pure fiction. Whatever works.

You're trying to convince just enough people that Obama caused the debt and deficits, started the wars, enacted Medicare Part D, was at the helm when we got hit on 9/11 weeks after getting an explicit warning that an attack was likely, and the complete ignoring of what was going on in Wall Street banks leading up to the worst finacial crisis since the Depression.

You hate the guy for whatever reason, and convincing others to think like you is your only point. That's what you get for reading Dr. Seuss books!

I didn't vote for Obama, and won't this time around either. But if you want to slime the guy, at least have some truth behind it. You don't.


Tue, 06/12/2012 - 15:21 | 2519077 Blankenstein
Blankenstein's picture

 Here's one strike for your hammer.  Barry O learned his politics the Chicago Way along with his former and current staff:  Axelrod, Daley, Emanuel, Jarrett, etc.  Chicago and Illinois are on their way to third world status due to the mafia style government where only those in the club get to play, the rest get to pay.  Both Chicago and Illinois are drowning in debt and the state AND city pensions are grossly underfunded.  Violent crime has soared in the city and Chicago now has roving mobs of people looking to attack and rob innocent citizens (wildings).  And the politicians haven't done anything to address this matasticizing debt or protect the citizenry from the crime wave, expect to try and downplay it in the news.  This Chicago Way has already infected the nation, four more years is the final nail in the coffin.  

Romney is not much better. We missed the one person, Ron Paul,  who would have had the most success at trying to steer us in the right direction, not step on the accelerator as we head toward the cliff.   

Tue, 06/12/2012 - 10:51 | 2517932 Axenolith
Axenolith's picture

And a bit of clarification.  I vote pretty much straight Libertarian or Lib leaning R in regional/local elections, but even there I've had Libertarian candidates on the ballot who actually supported forcing employers to hire temps/part time workers as full timers if they'd worked there for 6 months, so shitbags will use the Libertarian label as cover too (and in that race, congressional, there wasn't even a Republican on the ticket!)

You give O'bummer another 4 years in house, he's going to put 2 or 3 total "Constitution is silly putty" supremes in, plus hammer weapons rights from every angle.  The Reps might just screw up the balance sheet some more, but they are a hell of a lot more easy to defeat legislatively (as opposed to get your shit done) than straight up socialists and communists.  The latter will sacrifice themselves on the alter of their misguided or evil altruism but you can always use the fact that many Republicans are spineless pussies to your advantage.

Tue, 06/12/2012 - 10:58 | 2517972 DeadFred
DeadFred's picture

Politicians who lie... what a surprise. I was in a good mood this morning until I got half way through this video clip. Sucks. There's something to be said for denial, at least short term, and long term everyone's survival rate drops to zero.

Tue, 06/12/2012 - 11:02 | 2517988 Gully Foyle
Gully Foyle's picture


Libertarianism is the cool thing like Goddes worship or Hipster irony.

A good read of the following illustrates just how silly claiming to be a Libertarian.

Basically an american Libertarian has no idea just what politics they claim to be involved in.

Rand deemed you people "Hippies of the Right".

Read the following and have a good hearty laugh, or if you claim to be a Libertarian a good cry.

Libertarianism is a "moral and political outlook holding that individual liberty is the only proper concern of coercive social institutions".[1] Libertarians generally emphasize freedom, liberty, and voluntary association and advocate a society with a government of small scope relative to most present day societies.

The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy defines libertarianism as the moral view that agents initially fully own themselves and have certain moral powers to acquire property rights in external things.[2] Libertarian historian George Woodcock defines libertarianism as the philosophy that fundamentally doubts authority and advocates transforming society by reform or revolution.[3] Libertarian philosopher Roderick Long defines libertarianism as "any political position that advocates a radical redistribution of power from the coercive state to voluntary associations of free individuals", whether "voluntary association" takes the form of the free market or of communal co-operatives.[4] According to the U.S. Libertarian Party, libertarianism is the advocacy of a government that is funded voluntarily and limited to protecting individuals from coercion and violence.[5]

Libertarian schools of thought differ over the degree to which the state should be reduced. Anarchistic schools advocate complete elimination of the state. Minarchist schools advocate a state which is limited to protecting its citizens from aggression, theft, breach of contract, and fraud. Some schools accept public assistance for the poor.[6] Additionally, some schools are supportive of private property rights in the ownership of unappropriated land and natural resources while others reject such private ownership and often support common ownership instead.[7][8][9] Another distinction can be made among libertarians who support private ownership and those that support common ownership of the means of production; the former generally supporting a capitalist economy, the latter a socialist economic system. Contractarian libertarianism holds that any legitimate authority of government derives not from the consent of the governed, but from contract or mutual agreement, though this can be seen as reducible to consequentialism or deontologism depending on what grounds contracts are justified.[10][11][12] Some Libertarian socialists reject deontological and consequential approaches and use historical materialism to justify their political beliefs.[13]

Political scholars such as Noam Chomsky assert that in most countries the terms "libertarian" and "libertarianism" are synonymous with left anarchism.[14] It is only in the United States that the term libertarian is commonly associated with those who have conservative positions on economic issues and liberal positions on social issues, going by the common meanings of "conservative" and "liberal" in the United States.[15]


For the record, I shall repeat what I have said many times before: I do not join or endorse any political group or movement. More specifically, I disapprove of, disagree with, and have no connection with, the latest aberration of some conservatives, the so-called “hippies of the right,” who attempt to snare the younger or more careless ones of my readers by claiming simultanteously to be followers of my philosophy and advocates of anarchism. Anyone offering such a combination confesses his inability to understand either. Anarchism is the most irrational, anti-intellectual notion ever spun by the concrete-bound, context-dropping, whim-worshiping fringe of the collectivist movement, where it properly belongs.

“Brief Summary,”
The Objectivist, Sept. 1971, 1

Above all, do not join the wrong ideological groups or movements, in order to “do something.” By “ideological” (in this context), I mean groups or movements proclaiming some vaguely generalized, undefined (and, usually, contradictory) political goals. (E.g., the Conservative Party, which subordinates reason to faith, and substitutes theocracy for capitalism; or the “libertarian” hippies, who subordinate reason to whims, and substitute anarchism for capitalism.) To join such groups means to reverse the philosophical hierarchy and to sell out fundamental principles for the sake of some superficial political action which is bound to fail. It means that you help the defeat of your ideas and the victory of your enemies. (For a discussion of the reasons, see “The Anatomy of Compromise” in my book Capitalism: The Unknown Ideal.)

“What Can One Do?”
Philosophy: Who Needs It, 202

The “libertarians” . . . plagiarize Ayn Rand’s principle that no man may initiate the use of physical force, and treat it as a mystically revealed, out-of-context absolute . . . .

In the philosophical battle for a free society, the one crucial connection to be upheld is that between capitalism and reason. The religious conservatives are seeking to tie capitalism to mysticism; the “libertarians” are tying capitalism to the whim-worshipping subjectivism and chaos of anarchy. To cooperate with either group is to betray capitalism, reason, and one’s own future.

Harry Binswanger, “Q & A Department: Anarchism,”
The Objectivist Forum, Aug. 1981, 1

FREE MARKET: That condition of society in which all economic transactions result from voluntary choice without coercion.

THE STATE: That institution which interferes with the Free Market through the direct exercise of coercion or the granting of privileges (backed by coercion).

TAX: That form of coercion or interference with the Free Market in which the State collects tribute (the tax), allowing it to hire armed forces to practice coercion in defense of privilege, and also to engage in such wars, adventures, experiments, “reforms”, etc., as it pleases, not at its own cost, but at the cost of “its” subjects.

PRIVILEGE: From the Latin privi , private, and lege , law. An advantage granted by the State and protected by its powers of coercion. A law for private benefit.

USURY: That form of privilege or interference with the Free Market in which one State-supported group monopolizes the coinage and thereby takes tribute (interest), direct or indirect, on all or most economic transactions.

LANDLORDISM: That form of privilege or interference with the Free Market in which one State-supported group “owns” the land and thereby takes tribute (rent) from those who live, work, or produce on the land.

TARRIFF: That form of privilege or interference with the Free Market in which commodities produced outside the State are not allowed to compete equally with those produced inside the State.

CAPITALISM: That organization of society, incorporating elements of tax, usury, landlordism, and tariff, which thus denies the Free Market while pretending to exemplify it.

CONSERVATISM: That school of capitalist philosophy which claims allegiance to the Free Market while actually supporting usury, landlordism, tariff, and sometimes taxation.

LIBERALISM: That school of capitalist philosophy which attempts to correct the injustices of capitalism by adding new laws to the existing laws. Each time conservatives pass a law creating privilege, liberals pass another law modifying privilege, leading conservatives to pass a more subtle law recreating privilege, etc., until “everything not forbidden is compulsory” and “everything not compulsory is forbidden”.

SOCIALISM: The attempted abolition of all privilege by restoring power entirely to the coercive agent behind privilege, the State, thereby converting capitalist oligarchy into Statist monopoly. Whitewashing a wall by painting it black.

ANARCHISM: That organization of society in which the Free Market operates freely, without taxes, usury, landlordism, tariffs, or other forms of coercion or privilege. “Right” anarchists predict that in the Free Market people would voluntarily choose to compete more often than to cooperate; “left” anarchists predict that in the Free Market people would voluntarily choose to cooperate more often than to compete.

Robert Shea and Robert Anton Wilson, The Illuminatus! Trilogy

“Well I sometimes call myself a libertarian but that’s only because most people don’t know what anarchist means. Most people hear you’re an anarchist and they think you’re getting ready to throw a bomb at a building. They don’t understand the concept of voluntary association, the whole concept of replacing force with voluntary cooperation or contractual arrangements and so on. So libertarian is a clearer word that doesn’t arouse any immediate anxiety upon the listener. And then again, libertarians, if they were totally consistent with their principles would be anarchists.”

Robert Anton Wilson

Tue, 06/12/2012 - 11:13 | 2518036 Sophist Economicus
Sophist Economicus's picture

Nice try Gully.  


Here's a cut and paste you forgot:

Libertarianism is generally considered to be the group of political philosophies which emphasize freedom, individual liberty, and voluntary association. Libertarianism is variously defined by sources. There is no general consensus among scholars on the precise definition nor on how one should use the term as a historical category. Libertarians generally advocate a society with little or no government power.


Tell the union hall to get more readers.   Errors like this ruin credibility

Tue, 06/12/2012 - 11:16 | 2518060 Bob
Bob's picture

Damn.  +1

Tue, 06/12/2012 - 16:46 | 2519482 BooMushroom
BooMushroom's picture

Libertarians believe that there should be police, and military, with a legal monopoly on instigating violence against citizens who have forcefully taken rights away from other citizens, or from invading or threatening foreigners. Anarchists do not support police or military.

Tue, 06/12/2012 - 11:29 | 2518118 myshadow
myshadow's picture opposed to rawmoney who will put in two idiots to the right of scaliathomass.

Tue, 06/12/2012 - 11:04 | 2517999 pods
pods's picture

So you are not voting for Romney?

"you pick the one that lets you keep more of your shit and doesn't try to disarm you."


"In 2004, in the middle of his single four-year term as governor, Romney signed a permanent ban on assault weapons -- reportedly the first such state law in the country. "These guns are not made for recreation or self-defense," the Globe quoted Romney as saying. "They are instruments of destruction with the sole purpose of hunting down and killing people."

Tue, 06/12/2012 - 11:52 | 2518232 Saro
Saro's picture

Yeah, I'm not sure if he's saying that we should vote for the progressive, gun-banning architect of the new healthcare law . . . or Obama.

Tue, 06/12/2012 - 12:07 | 2518308 pods
pods's picture


Tue, 06/12/2012 - 11:05 | 2518004 walküre
walküre's picture

How do you know who that might be?

Do you BELIEVE what a politician tells you? That makes you an idiot or greatest fool.

Reread the text above.

Tue, 06/12/2012 - 11:08 | 2518011 Gully Foyle
Gully Foyle's picture


wow, just like cheering for your favorite team.

Do you do a flash mob wave with that?

Hate to burts your bubble, but there is no choice.

It's all been predetermined by the powers that be.

If you really think your vote or opinion counts for anything in the greater scheme of things, you are most likely mentally ill.

By the way Romney is already chosen. Collapse and Martial law come within the first two years in office. And the Genpop will welcome the security.

Tue, 06/12/2012 - 11:10 | 2518023 bigkahuna
bigkahuna's picture

Your rhetoric smacks of status quo propaganda.

Tue, 06/12/2012 - 12:09 | 2518318 Ricky Bobby
Ricky Bobby's picture

He is paid by the word, he gets double for Bold. Just working his way up the ladder hoping to get on Maxine Waters staff some day.

Tue, 06/12/2012 - 11:10 | 2518012 BattlegroundEur...
BattlegroundEurope2011's picture

Its dumb sh1ts like you who keep the system going.

Don't vote.  Then when voter turnout statistics are shown as <50% then the politicians will realise that they do not have the will of the people.

Tue, 06/12/2012 - 11:15 | 2518055 CommunityStandard
CommunityStandard's picture

Better to vote with a write-in than not vote.  Low turnout can mean any number of things (mostly laziness or not caring).  A write-in is a statement on not agreeing with the current system.  I'm pretty sure if there were enough write-ins, it would be talked about.  People would ask each other "Did you write in a name?  Why did you do that?"  It would open up the discussion.

Tue, 06/12/2012 - 11:31 | 2518132 ffart
ffart's picture

How do you actually know the votes in the current system are even being counted? The secret ballot and dead people having voting record not evidence enough that it's all a fraud?

Tue, 06/12/2012 - 11:50 | 2518224 CommunityStandard
CommunityStandard's picture

If the ENTIRETY of the election results was made up (and I don't believe any person or group has the intellegence and ability to pull it off), then there wouldn't be any reason to sneak in dead people / illegal immigrant / children votes.  Yes, voter fraud exists.  It's even more of a reason to stand and vote for neither party.  Imagine if a majority of the country wrote-in a name?  The fraud would be revealed.

Of course, having a majority write-in candidate is never going to happen.  There's no concerted effort to reach out to people and no desire to do so.  That would involve viewing the population as, well, people.

Tue, 06/12/2012 - 11:15 | 2518056 Overfed
Overfed's picture

"Then when voter turnout statistics are shown as <50% then the politicians will realise that they do not have the will of the people."


What makes you think they give a shit?

Tue, 06/12/2012 - 12:33 | 2518392 odatruf
odatruf's picture

Serious question: in their shoes, would you?

Tue, 06/12/2012 - 13:18 | 2518545 Overfed
Overfed's picture

Were I also a sociopathic narcissist like most politicians, I dare say that I wouldn't.

Tue, 06/12/2012 - 13:04 | 2518505 psychobilly
psychobilly's picture


What makes you think they give a shit?

The huge amount of money and effort put into trying to manufacture consent through every means imaginable.  Why else capture the media?  Or the school system?  Or blanket the internet with a locust swarm of trolls?

It's only a matter of time before they implement compulsory voting as has been done in other countries.

Tue, 06/12/2012 - 13:37 | 2518621 Umh
Umh's picture

Yeah! That way they can get voters who know even less than the current ones!

Tue, 06/12/2012 - 12:54 | 2518467 F. Bastiat
F. Bastiat's picture

Absolutely.  Zero Hedge can do better than such fatuous drivel.

Tue, 06/12/2012 - 14:17 | 2518796 dugorama
dugorama's picture

honest question: who is the disarmer?  as far as I know pacifist Romney joined the NRA for the first time within the last couple months and obama has done nothing to concern me vis-a-vis gun ownership yet (through 3 years in power).  i'm inclined to prefer Obama on this dimension

Tue, 06/12/2012 - 10:44 | 2517900 tarsubil
tarsubil's picture

What if we have the choice of two evils because we as a people are evil? What if we are an immoral people who pride themselves on being moral? What if this country deserves these evil men as choices? What if it is already over and those that want liberty have no place in this country anymore?

Tue, 06/12/2012 - 11:12 | 2518005 AlaricBalth
AlaricBalth's picture


'We get the government we deserve'  Alexis de Tocqueville

Don Henley - A Month of Sundays (From 1985)

I used to work for Harvester
I used to use my hands
I used to make the tractors and the combines that plowed and harvested
this great land
Now I see my handiwork on the block everywhere I turn
And I see the clouds `cross the weathered faces and I watch the harvest burn

I quit the plant in `57
Had some time for farmin` then
Banks back then was lendin` money
The banker was the farmer`s friend
And I`ve seen dog days and dusty days;
Late spring snow and early fall sleet;
I`ve held the leather reins in my hands and felt the soft ground under my feet
Between the hot dry weather and the taxes, and the Cold War it`s been hard
to make ends meet
But I always kept the clothes on our backs;
I always put the shoes on our feet

My grandson, he comes home from college
He says, `We get the government we deserve.`
My son-in-law just shakes his head and says, `That little punk, he never
had to serve.`
And I sit here in the shadow of the suburbs and look out across these
empty fields
I sit here in earshot of the bypass and all night I listen to the rushin`
of the wheels

The big boys, they all got computers; got incorporated, too
Me, I just know how to raise things
That was all I ever knew
Now, it all comes down to numbers
Now I`m glad that I have quit
Folks these days just don`t do nothin` simply for the love of it

I went into town on the Fourth of July
Watched `em parade past the Union Jack
Watched `em break out the brass and beat on the drum
One step forward and two steps back
And I saw a sign on Easy Street, said, `Be Prepared to Stop.`
Pray for the independent, little man
I don`t see next year`s crop
And I sit here on the back porch in the twilight
And I hear the crickets hum
I sit and watch the lightning in the distance but the showers never come
I sit here and listen to the wind blow
I sit here and rub my hands
I sit here and listen to the clock strike, and I wonder when I`ll see my
companion again


Tue, 06/12/2012 - 11:24 | 2518096 Vince Clortho
Vince Clortho's picture

What if boar hogs had tits?

Tue, 06/12/2012 - 13:39 | 2518632 Umh
Umh's picture

They do.

Tue, 06/12/2012 - 11:42 | 2518185 ONO47
ONO47's picture

Drowning Pool


Let the bodies hit the floor
Let the bodies hit the floor
Let the bodies hit the floor
Let the bodies hit the floooooor
Beaten why for (why for)
Can't take much more
Here we go!
Here we go!
Here we go!
One - Nothing wrong with me
Two - Nothing wrong with me
Three - Nothing wrong with me
Four - Nothing wrong with me

One - Something's got to give
Two - Something's got to give
Three - Something's got to give
Let the bodies hit the floor
Let the bodies hit the floor
Let the bodies hit the flooooor
Let the bodies hit the floor
Let the bodies hit the floor
Let the bodies hit the flooooor
Push me again
This is the end
Here we go!
Here we go!
Here we go!
One - Nothing wrong with me
Two - Nothing wrong with me
Three - Nothing wrong with me
Four - Nothing wrong with me
One - Something's got to give
Two - Something's got to give
Three - Something's got to give
Let the bodies hit the floor
Let the bodies hit the floor
Let the bodies hit the flooooor
Let the bodies hit the floor
Let the bodies hit the floor
Let the bodies hit the floor
Skin against skin blood and bone
You're all by yourself but you're not alone
You wanted in now you're here
Driven by hate
consumed by fear
Let the bodies hit the floor
Let the bodies hit the floor
Let the bodies hit the floor
Let the bodies hit the floooooooor
One - Nothing wrong with me
Two - Nothing wrong with me
Three - Nothing wrong with me
Four - Nothing wrong with me
One - Something's got to give
Two - Something's got to give
Three - Something's got to give
Let the bodies hit the floor
Let the bodies hit the floor
Let the bodies hit the flooooor
Let the bodies hit the floor
Let the bodies hit the floor
Let the bodies hit the floor

Tue, 06/12/2012 - 10:58 | 2517977 Chump
Chump's picture

But according to friends and coworkers, that's the same as voting for Obama!  And if I do that, and he wins, America will surely collapse!  Sure, as governor of MA Mitt signed a gun ban in addition to instituting single-payer Romneycare, but he's not Obama.

Vote for Obama in 2008 - he's not Bush.

Vote for Romney in 2012 - he's not Obama.

I think I see where this is going.

Tue, 06/12/2012 - 10:59 | 2517980 mess nonster
mess nonster's picture

Red pill, blue pill... red pill, blue pill...

Waitaminnit! Who's MAKING THE FUCKING PILLS???????

Tue, 06/12/2012 - 11:05 | 2518003 FL_Conservative
FL_Conservative's picture

Like me, I know that most everyone here wanted Ron Paul to have a realistic chance of gaining the nomination.  It hasn't happenned.  So what do we do now?  Put our head in the sand?  Stay home in November and allow the Marxists/Communist/Socialists to re-elect their man, at the expense of allowing our economy to devolve further?  Really?????  At this point, we know what we're going to get from Obama & Co and it will only get worse; it will be an unbridled, unaccountable assault on private industry, small businesses and anyone with a modicum of accumulated wealth.  At least with making the choice for Rumney, I have a higher confidence that the economy, business environment and employment picture will improve, which is critical for America NOW.  And maybe, just maybe, if enough "little r's" get regular face time with him (i.e., Rand Paul, maybe even Ron Paul), we can start moving towards dismantling the government leviathan. (How about Ron Paul for Treasury Secretary?)  For now, I'm willing to accept measurable progress towards that goal, because I know the other alternative will do nothing towards that end and will only make things that much worse.

Tue, 06/12/2012 - 11:56 | 2518263 Saro
Saro's picture

If Obama really is the worst choice (hard to say), I'd rather have him in office to bring it all down faster.

Enough beating around the bush, I say.  Let the bankers elect whichever puppet they choose between the two and let's get this shitpile of an economy flushed already.

Tue, 06/12/2012 - 11:11 | 2518025 El Oregonian
El Oregonian's picture

Communist or Non-communist

This is your choice people. Other than that there is not a dime's worth of difference.

Tue, 06/12/2012 - 11:17 | 2518062 Chump
Chump's picture

So what you're saying then is that there's not a dime's worth of difference...

Tue, 06/12/2012 - 11:31 | 2518127 El Oregonian
El Oregonian's picture

Both their views on healthcare, abortion, immigration, Goldman Sachs, J.P. Morgan, TARP, bailouts, big government, The Fed, War, Allies, U.N., Global Warming... ect..ect..

One's a Communist the other is not....

Tue, 06/12/2012 - 11:36 | 2518149 Chump
Chump's picture

Wait, what?  Their views on all those issues are the same, so what the hell does it matter whether "one is a commie" or not?  They are the same.

Tue, 06/12/2012 - 12:13 | 2518332 Ricky Bobby
Ricky Bobby's picture

Which one of the two is Communist?

Tue, 06/12/2012 - 13:25 | 2518532 psychobilly
psychobilly's picture


Which one of the two is Communist?

The best part about people voting for either Romney or Obama is that it allows us to quickly identify those who are probably beyond help; because they are either too stupid or too corrupt.   

Maybe someone who is brand new to the game should be given a pass, but there is simply no excuse for continuing to fall for the same stupid human/pet tricks over and over and over.

Can you roll over and bark on command as well?

Tue, 06/12/2012 - 14:27 | 2518833 El Oregonian
El Oregonian's picture


Tue, 06/12/2012 - 17:30 | 2519624 Overfed
Overfed's picture

Neither are communist. Both are globofascists, and should dance at the end of a rope.

Tue, 06/12/2012 - 11:40 | 2518174 LoneCapitalist
LoneCapitalist's picture

Not taking part in the "charade" is not an answer. The "charade" will go on withuot you and you will be bound by the outcome.

Tue, 06/12/2012 - 12:53 | 2518466 BigJim
BigJim's picture

You will be bound by the outcome whether you vote or not.

Tue, 06/12/2012 - 13:51 | 2518674 Bob
Bob's picture

Assuming the outcome is actually what voters put into the Diebolt machines. 

Tue, 06/12/2012 - 12:16 | 2518338 rwe2late
rwe2late's picture

When your choice is between two evils, choose neither. -Deo vindice

Actually it is the same evil, with a choice between two lessers.

- - -

Attempting to find which candidate publicly jokes less, lies less, knows less, and promises less is an exercise in futility,

since both are vetted and intend to do their best to serve WAR inc. and the bankster syndicate.

Tue, 06/12/2012 - 13:21 | 2518529 batterycharged
batterycharged's picture

I disagree with all the right-wing mumbo jumbo here, as if Romney is some socialist.

But I am the biggest proponent of 3rd parties.

Unfortunately money runs elections and it's easier to buy off 2 parties than three or four.... And it's even easier to control the media to make people think they only have 2 choices.

"Don't waste your vote on a 3rd party" should have been the theme of this article rather than the lesser of 2 evils. Because after all, if people are willing to accept the status quo and simply pick the candidate that slightly appeals to them more, so be it.

But if they are in fear of "wasting their vote" then that is a sytemic problem that makes our democracy, hardly a democracy. It's no different than the tyranny of force.

We actually have laws in the land that don't recognize 3rd parties. We have laws that establish the dems/reps in power (see minority whip, etc.). We're hardly any different than the Communist state, where you could run off the communist just couldn't have any power.

I call it the two-party tyranny. People are blind to accept it. And only a truly bad downturn will change it, see the great depression and the rise of the socialist party.

Tue, 06/12/2012 - 13:44 | 2518654 SilverDOG
SilverDOG's picture

Voting for Ron Paul, is far more audible, than dissenting silence.

Tue, 06/12/2012 - 10:32 | 2517852 camaro68ss
camaro68ss's picture

Im voting Obama so the collapse can happen faster and we can get this over with and start to rebuild.

both options blow

Tue, 06/12/2012 - 10:35 | 2517864 SilverTree
SilverTree's picture

A growing idea/strategy.

Tue, 06/12/2012 - 10:49 | 2517919 LasVegasDave
LasVegasDave's picture

A second Obama term is bullish for PMs

Profit from Profligacy

Tue, 06/12/2012 - 10:49 | 2517921 bobnoxy
bobnoxy's picture

Do you mean the collapse that started under Bush and Republican control of Congress?

Tue, 06/12/2012 - 10:53 | 2517946 tarsubil
tarsubil's picture

Blue Douche: Republicans are evil!

Red Douche: Democrats are evil!

Gordon Freeman: You are both right.

Blue Douche and Red Douche together: Shut up!

Tue, 06/12/2012 - 11:01 | 2517986 BlueCollaredOne
BlueCollaredOne's picture

I was going to flame you, but then I saw you have only been here for 10 weeks.  You will find most of us here at ZH are smart enough to see through the false left/right paradigm that you have been spoon fed for your entire life. Whether you vote R or D, the government still wins.  Its called continuity of agenda.

Take a seat, pour a drink, and maybe limit your posting until you've been awoken.

Tue, 06/12/2012 - 11:18 | 2518065 bobnoxy
bobnoxy's picture

I just checked to see what mpact on my life I would endure by your flaming me, and it looks to be close to zero, so waste your time. Sure, a lot of smart people in here, offset by a lot of people who seem to get their news from Glenn Beck, Limbuagh and Hannity. No I.Q. test given for posting rights here.

Tue, 06/12/2012 - 11:35 | 2518133 BlueCollaredOne
BlueCollaredOne's picture


"No I.Q. test given for posting rights here"

Clearly, as you have demonstrated remarkably with your original post.  Keep on believing that the president isn't just a puppet.  Looking through the comments section I haven't found a single viewpoint from a commenter who is parroting anything from "Beck, Limbaugh or Hannity." Most are in favor of Ron Paul, who is laughed out by the bought and paid for media.

Tue, 06/12/2012 - 11:36 | 2518161 bobnoxy
bobnoxy's picture

You got boring in record time.

Tue, 06/12/2012 - 11:52 | 2518235 Abiotic Oil
Abiotic Oil's picture

Are you a TIT (troll-in-training), suffering from normalcy bias or just stupid?

Tue, 06/12/2012 - 12:03 | 2518294 bobnoxy
bobnoxy's picture

You seem to be trying way too hard to appear smart. Ease up, kid!

Tue, 06/12/2012 - 11:59 | 2518274 fuu
fuu's picture

You've been boring for 10 weeks now.

Tue, 06/12/2012 - 12:04 | 2518298 bobnoxy
bobnoxy's picture

I'm hurt. No, really! zzzzzzzzzz

Tue, 06/12/2012 - 12:01 | 2518282 CommunityStandard
CommunityStandard's picture

Dude, don't feed the trolls.  They'll get bored and leave soon enough.

Do NOT follow this link or you will be banned from the site!