QotD

[inibo]

Friends, it's very simple: if you support Barack Obama and the Democrats -- even if reluctantly, even if you're just being all sophisticatedly super-savvy and blogospherically strategic about it, playing the "long game" or eleven-dimensional chess or what have you -- you are supporting the outright murder of innocent people who have never done

Comments

[ytterbius]

BS. If you want to go that far, then you pretty much don't even get to go to the grocery store; even if you take the bus there.

[inibo]

I'm not saying you're wrong, but you haven't shown the connection between my buying groceries and dead people in Pakistan. Last time I checked I checked Safeway didn't have any drones. Maybe you could flesh out your argument for me.

[elnigma]

I'm confused by this article. Who are they saying is getting killed in Pakistan?
Obama got voted in by people tired of pointless war, so saying "oh you voted Obama, you must want war and innocent people to die" doesn't follow. There was a choice of Bush legacy (McCain/Palin) = pointless war or Obama= in hope he'll stop some. That being said, all agree that Obama has disappointed many who wanted him to do more regarding said hopes.

[kanra_izaya]

Voted for =/= supporting him now.

[inibo]

Exactly. Politicians fool people. Welcome to the real world. But once the promises evaporate and it's the same all over again, if you're still defending him...

[ytterbius]

Ok

[inibo]

I may or may not respond to particular points in this, but on the whole I don't think I've ever read a more cogent defense of consensus opinion and the status quo. You should write for the New York Times.

[ytterbius]

I know that that's not meant as a compliment. LOL!

Agorism? Not surprising, but futile, and quite likely counterproductive.

[inibo]

There have always been people who find freedom to be futile and counterproductive, but I'm not one of them.