How many humans will he kill as president -- I mean -- how many more than either identity twin would?
Nice simple question for a pwog to conjure with -- given pwogs being basically the type that really get into weighing all folks equal and such. So really, I mean really, balance it up, gang. Bucket o' blood against bucket o' blood.
I can hear the heavy stertorous breathing already, as flight-deck Pappy morphs into Darth McCain. "People of earth! Your time is up!" -- then one big sea of floating human body parts sloshing about from ocean shore to ocean shore. Ahhh, the humanity, ahhh the mud the blood and the beer!
That is -- if he lives so long.
Comments (4)
yeah...just like allan nairn said on DN!:
AMY GOODMAN: Are you saying that there’s no difference between [clinton, obama and edwards]?
ALLAN NAIRN: Well, fundamentally, there’s no difference on the basic principle of, are you against the killing of civilians and are you willing to enforce the murder laws. If we were willing to enforce the murder laws, the headquarters of each of these candidates could be raided, and various advisers and many candidates could be hauled away by the cops, because they have backed various actions that, under established principles like the Nuremberg Principles, like the principles set up in the Rwanda tribunals, the Bosnia tribunals, things that are unacceptable, like aggressive war, like the killing of civilians for political purposes. So, in a basic sense, there is no choice.
http://www.democracynow.org/2008/1/3/vote_for_change_atrocity_linked_us
Posted by tim d | April 1, 2008 6:01 AM
Posted on April 1, 2008 06:01
With McCain, we get Joe Lieberman as eminence grise.
Owen, I'm sure he'd live out the full length length of his term. They'd cyborg him, if necessary, just like they did to Cheney.
Posted by Al Schumann | April 1, 2008 2:16 PM
Posted on April 1, 2008 14:16
nairn:
"let’s say, you have two candidates that are 99% the same—there’s only 1% difference between them—if you’re talking about decisions that affect a million lives—1% of a million is 10,000—that’s 10,000 lives. So, even though it’s a bitter choice, if you choose the one who is going to kill 10,000 fewer people, well, then you’ve saved 10,000 lives. We shouldn’t be limited to that choice. It’s unacceptable. And Americans should start to realize that it’s unacceptable. "
boil it down to the net diff
save ten thousand living human souls
stop mcpappy
this rude
short haul calculus
is it complete enough for ya ???
if we are to even vote
let alone "work for it "
ought we not
"demand"
an anti empire candidate
btw is ralph anti empire
is his " curb the corps now "
anti empire
or just empire xxx-lite
Posted by op | April 2, 2008 10:33 AM
Posted on April 2, 2008 10:33
OP - not you're right, Nairn seems to imply in that interview that even nader is soft on murder, if not an outright collaborator for endorsing Edwards...
Posted by Tim D | April 3, 2008 2:05 PM
Posted on April 3, 2008 14:05