Clarification on Voting
Monday November 06th 2006, 5:29 pm
Last week I wrote here that I consider voting to be a form of treason. I need to clarify that remark. I indeed consider voting treason, that is if you vote for an incumbent or a candidate in opposition that does not represent nine eleven truth, the impeachment of the neocon-Bush-Cheney gang, or swearing to uphold the Constitution and the Bill of Rights, the latter seriously in danger of extinction.
Mike Rivero provides a guide for antiwar candidates here.
As a resident of New Mexico, I am not lucky enough to have a pro-peace, antiwar candidate. In fact, in my district, the Democrat running against the Republican incumbent declares his desire to “win the peace in Iraq,” that is to say he supports more of the same, like a large number of Democrats running, except for those mentioned on the page linked above. “Reverend Al Kissling Democratic Candidate for Congress expressed his disbelief with the revelation of how close Anbar Province is to being lost to Iraqi insurgents,” a media advisory states. In other words, the province will be lost to the people who live there, since virtually all Sunni Muslims are “insurgents.”
“When you combine this news with the revelation that the Taliban has retaken the South of Afghanistan and harvested a record opium crop, it’s painfully obvious that our strategies for defeating terrorism are flawed,” Mr. Kissling declares, thus demonstrating he is another clueless Democrat. Obviously, if one asks for the feeding of the 5,000 or a Democrat in New Mexico who understands that the Taliban virtually stamped out opium production and the CIA and U.S. banksters have a vested interest in opium production, one is likely to receive the former.
I will vote against bond issues and turning our police into ninja SWAT teams tomorrow.
It’s too bad there are no pro-peace, antiwar, pro-Constitution candidates in New Mexico.
If you have one, go out and vote.
Monday November 06th 2006, 5:29 pm
Last week I wrote here that I consider voting to be a form of treason. I need to clarify that remark. I indeed consider voting treason, that is if you vote for an incumbent or a candidate in opposition that does not represent nine eleven truth, the impeachment of the neocon-Bush-Cheney gang, or swearing to uphold the Constitution and the Bill of Rights, the latter seriously in danger of extinction.
Mike Rivero provides a guide for antiwar candidates here.
As a resident of New Mexico, I am not lucky enough to have a pro-peace, antiwar candidate. In fact, in my district, the Democrat running against the Republican incumbent declares his desire to “win the peace in Iraq,” that is to say he supports more of the same, like a large number of Democrats running, except for those mentioned on the page linked above. “Reverend Al Kissling Democratic Candidate for Congress expressed his disbelief with the revelation of how close Anbar Province is to being lost to Iraqi insurgents,” a media advisory states. In other words, the province will be lost to the people who live there, since virtually all Sunni Muslims are “insurgents.”
“When you combine this news with the revelation that the Taliban has retaken the South of Afghanistan and harvested a record opium crop, it’s painfully obvious that our strategies for defeating terrorism are flawed,” Mr. Kissling declares, thus demonstrating he is another clueless Democrat. Obviously, if one asks for the feeding of the 5,000 or a Democrat in New Mexico who understands that the Taliban virtually stamped out opium production and the CIA and U.S. banksters have a vested interest in opium production, one is likely to receive the former.
I will vote against bond issues and turning our police into ninja SWAT teams tomorrow.
It’s too bad there are no pro-peace, antiwar, pro-Constitution candidates in New Mexico.
If you have one, go out and vote.
posted by Tapir's Rants at 8:52 PM
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home