Romney vs. Obama

[Demon of Undoing]

Gridlock doesn't mean that the government doesn't oppress you. It means that the government cannot change oppressive and broken laws.

Re: DEA, TSA, etc...

Might be relevant if anybody was actually trying to restrain them. In lieu of that, I will take paralysis in their ability to muck up other things.

[cdgt]

Gridlock doesn't mean that the government doesn't oppress you. It means that the government cannot change oppressive and broken laws.

Re: DEA, TSA, etc...

Might be relevant if anybody was actually trying to restrain them. In lieu of that, I will take paralysis in their ability to muck up other things.

^ Bravo, sir!

• Viva Gridlock!

[Typhoon]

Gridlock doesn't mean that the government doesn't oppress you. It means that the government cannot change oppressive and broken laws.

Re: DEA, TSA, etc...

Govt bureaucracies seek to expand their mission, influence, and power regardless of who is in power.

Aided and abetted by both the Demopublicans and Republicrats.

[Milo]

Gridlock doesn't mean that the government doesn't oppress you. It means that the government cannot change oppressive and broken laws.

Re: DEA, TSA, etc...

Govt bureaucracies seek to expand their mission, influence, and power regardless of who is in power.

Aided and abetted by both the Demopublicans and Republicrats.

I see this a lot these days but I'm not sure where one goes with it. It has no solution: neither party nor gridlock solve the above, so why would it change one's voting behavior?

IOW, if the game is rigged, but it's the only one in town, what good does it do not to play, and lose your only shot?

[cdgt]

Gridlock doesn't mean that the government doesn't oppress you. It means that the government cannot change oppressive and broken laws.

Re: DEA, TSA, etc...

Govt bureaucracies seek to expand their mission, influence, and power regardless of who is in power.

Aided and abetted by both the Demopublicans and Republicrats.

Yes.*

• * If you haven't read the section on the British Admiralty (scroll down to the The Scientific Proofs), it's hilarious.

[cdgt]

I see this a lot these days but I'm not sure where one goes with it. It has no solution: neither party nor gridlock solve the above, so why would it change one's voting behavior?

IOW, if the game is rigged, but it's the only one in town, what good does it do not to play, and lose your only shot?

Correct, gridlock doesn't solve the problem. Gridlock is merely the least bad of all possible outcomes.

[Hoosiernorm]

BD75KOoNR9k

New campaign ad which really different from his original message of "Change". It's odd that he would choose to become George Bush to get re-elected.

[AzariLoveIran]

.


THE president who won the Nobel Peace Prize less than nine months after his inauguration has turned out to be one of the most militarily aggressive American leaders in decades.

.

Liberals helped to elect Barack Obama in part because of his opposition to the Iraq war, and probably don’t celebrate all of the president’s many military accomplishments. But they are sizable.

Mr. Obama decimated Al Qaeda’s leadership. He overthrew the Libyan dictator. He ramped up drone attacks in Pakistan, waged effective covert wars in Yemen and Somalia and authorized a threefold increase in the number of American troops in Afghanistan. He became the first president to authorize the assassination of a United States citizen, Anwar al-Awlaki, who was born in New Mexico and played an operational role in Al Qaeda, and was killed in an American drone strike in Yemen. And, of course, Mr. Obama ordered and oversaw the Navy SEAL raid that killed Osama bin Laden.

more @ link

.

.

[Enki]

I see this a lot these days but I'm not sure where one goes with it. It has no solution: neither party nor gridlock solve the above, so why would it change one's voting behavior?

IOW, if the game is rigged, but it's the only one in town, what good does it do not to play, and lose your only shot?

Correct, gridlock doesn't solve the problem. Gridlock is merely the least bad of all possible outcomes.

No, it isn't at all. It's the most oppressive of all possible outcomes.

[Mr. Perfect]

I see this a lot these days but I'm not sure where one goes with it. It has no solution: neither party nor gridlock solve the above, so why would it change one's voting behavior?

IOW, if the game is rigged, but it's the only one in town, what good does it do not to play, and lose your only shot?

Correct, gridlock doesn't solve the problem. Gridlock is merely the least bad of all possible outcomes.

No, it isn't at all. It's the most oppressive of all possible outcomes.

How so? And if so, you should really like it.

[Marcus]

Just received this . . is it true?
************************************

> TRUE CHARACTER

> >
> > Yep, character does matter, and what we have been hearing in the
> > media recently has been quite shocking. I thought you might like to
> > see another side of one of the candidates. It appears there is more
> > to the Bain Capital story than is being told, so I hope this story
> > below is informative.
> >
> >
> >
> > Romney's character.... This facet of Romney's personality isn't so subtle.
> >
> > In July 1996, the 14-year-old daughter of Robert Gay, a partner at
> > Bain Capital, had disappeared. She had attended a rave party in New
> > York City and gotten high on ecstasy. Three days later, her
> > distraught father had no idea where she was.
> >
> >
> >
> > Romney took immediate action. He closed down the entire firm and
> > asked all 30 partners and employees to fly to New York to help find
> > Gay's daughter. Romney set up a command center at the LaGuardia
> > Marriott and hired a private detective firm to assist with the
> > search. He established a toll-free number for tips, coordinating the
> > effort with the NYPD, and went through his Rolodex and called everyone
> > Bain did business with in New York, and asked them to help find his
> > friend's missing daughter.
> >
> >
> >
> > Romney's accountants at Price Waterhouse Cooper put up posters on
> > street poles, while cashiers at a pharmacy owned by Bain put fliers in
> > the bag of every shopper. Romney and the other Bain employees
> > scoured every part of New York and talked with everyone they could -
> > prostitutes, drug addicts - anyone.
> >
> >
> >
> > That day, their hunt made the evening news, which featured photos
> > of the girl and the Bain employees searching for her. As a result, a
> > teenage boy phoned in, asked if there was a reward, and then hung up
> > abruptly. The NYPD traced the call to a house in New Jersey, where
> > they found the girl in the basement, shivering and experiencing
> > withdrawal symptoms from a massive ecstasy dose. Doctors later said
> > the girl might not have survived another day.
> >
> >
> >
> > Romney's former partner credits Mitt Romney with saving his
> > daughter's life, saying, "It was the most amazing thing, and I'll
> > never forget this to the day I die."
> >
> > So, here's my epiphany: Mitt Romney simply can't help himself. He
> > sees a problem, and his mind immediately sets to work solving it,
> > sometimes consciously, and sometimes not-so-consciously. He doesn't
> > do it for self-aggrandizement, or for personal gain. He does it
> > because that's just how he's wired.
> >
> >
> >
> > Many people are unaware of the fact that when Romney was asked by
> > his old employer, Bill Bain, to come back to Bain & Company as CEO to
> > rescue the firm from bankruptcy, Romney left Bain Capital to work at
> > Bain & Company for an annual salary of one dollar.
> >
> >
> >
> > When Romney went to the rescue of the 2002 Salt Lake Olympics, he
> > accepted no salary for three years, and would not use an expense
> > account. He also accepted no salary as Governor of Massachusetts.
> >
> > Character counts!! (and yes...that's worth reading again!)

[Enki]

Definitely a point in his favor. His wealthy friends can depend on him to the ends of the Earth. And I truly do believe that's a sign of good character, if true.

But since he doesn't give a lavender about me or my children, why does his character matter?

[Mr. Perfect]

Boy are you ever boiling over with resentments these days! I wonder what the trigger was.

[monster_gardener]

Just received this . . is it true?
************************************

> TRUE CHARACTER

> >
> > Yep, character does matter, and what we have been hearing in the
> > media recently has been quite shocking. I thought you might like to
> > see another side of one of the candidates. It appears there is more
> > to the Bain Capital story than is being told, so I hope this story
> > below is informative.
> >
> >
> >
> > Romney's character.... This facet of Romney's personality isn't so subtle.
> >
> > In July 1996, the 14-year-old daughter of Robert Gay, a partner at
> > Bain Capital, had disappeared. She had attended a rave party in New
> > York City and gotten high on ecstasy. Three days later, her
> > distraught father had no idea where she was.
> >
> >
> >
> > Romney took immediate action. He closed down the entire firm and
> > asked all 30 partners and employees to fly to New York to help find
> > Gay's daughter. Romney set up a command center at the LaGuardia
> > Marriott and hired a private detective firm to assist with the
> > search. He established a toll-free number for tips, coordinating the
> > effort with the NYPD, and went through his Rolodex and called everyone
> > Bain did business with in New York, and asked them to help find his
> > friend's missing daughter.
> >
> >
> >
> > Romney's accountants at Price Waterhouse Cooper put up posters on
> > street poles, while cashiers at a pharmacy owned by Bain put fliers in
> > the bag of every shopper. Romney and the other Bain employees
> > scoured every part of New York and talked with everyone they could -
> > prostitutes, drug addicts - anyone.
> >
> >
> >
> > That day, their hunt made the evening news, which featured photos
> > of the girl and the Bain employees searching for her. As a result, a
> > teenage boy phoned in, asked if there was a reward, and then hung up
> > abruptly. The NYPD traced the call to a house in New Jersey, where
> > they found the girl in the basement, shivering and experiencing
> > withdrawal symptoms from a massive ecstasy dose. Doctors later said
> > the girl might not have survived another day.
> >
> >
> >
> > Romney's former partner credits Mitt Romney with saving his
> > daughter's life, saying, "It was the most amazing thing, and I'll
> > never forget this to the day I die."
> >
> > So, here's my epiphany: Mitt Romney simply can't help himself. He
> > sees a problem, and his mind immediately sets to work solving it,
> > sometimes consciously, and sometimes not-so-consciously. He doesn't
> > do it for self-aggrandizement, or for personal gain. He does it
> > because that's just how he's wired.
> >
> >
> >
> > Many people are unaware of the fact that when Romney was asked by
> > his old employer, Bill Bain, to come back to Bain & Company as CEO to
> > rescue the firm from bankruptcy, Romney left Bain Capital to work at
> > Bain & Company for an annual salary of one dollar.
> >
> >
> >
> > When Romney went to the rescue of the 2002 Salt Lake Olympics, he
> > accepted no salary for three years, and would not use an expense
> > account. He also accepted no salary as Governor of Massachusetts.
> >
> > Character counts!! (and yes...that's worth reading again!)

Thank you Very Much for your post, Marcus.

FWIW, Snopes says the story is true.............

http://www.snopes.com/politics/romney/search.asp

This does make me think better of him...........

Had been quite turned off by Bain's misbehavior toward employees from Puerto Rico who were persuaded to transfer to the mainland, laid off AND then asked to repay moving expenses to Bain....


I like someone who does something like this rescue.........

I don't like someone who exploits workers like the Puerto Ricans were...........

Wiki on Robert Gay says he like Romney is LDS..........

Being a Mason can have similar benefits....... If you are a Mason.........

Nice that Romney served without salary.......... or expense account

But will the policies Romney advocates for the alleged benefit of the financial elite oops I mean nation filter down to little people like me........

Not happy with Pres.* Obama and ESPECIALLY that Fast and Furious Liar of an Attorney General Eric Holder ..........

Should I vote for Romney in the Bain oops I mean Vain Hope for Change for the better or just protest vote Ron Paul or Gary Johnson?.......

May not matter..........

Where I live Obama is not going to win unless Romney is found to have multiple wives ..... or is found in bed with a live boy or dead girl....... Not likely..

Even the Democrats in office here don't like Obama because Obama does not like or respect them............



* Trying to give Pres. Obama the respect due the office at least once per post

[cdgt]

I see this a lot these days but I'm not sure where one goes with it. It has no solution: neither party nor gridlock solve the above, so why would it change one's voting behavior?

IOW, if the game is rigged, but it's the only one in town, what good does it do not to play, and lose your only shot?

Correct, gridlock doesn't solve the problem. Gridlock is merely the least bad of all possible outcomes.

No, it isn't at all. It's the most oppressive of all possible outcomes.

^ Blatantly false. Can you not think of any possible outcome, any historical outcome, more oppressive than the current gridlock in the U.S. government?

• Psssst. You're shrieking.

[noddy]

well in my world i get to choose between

* those that want to bring in lots of new taxes and restrictions and standards that price me out of my own existence to save the world from c02 whilst neglecting to do anything about the environmental problems i actually do believe in (deforestation and water management) whilst sneeking in a bit of union/corporate appeasement.

* those that want to hype up the war on terrror and war on drugs and increase the police state and fear politics whilst sneeking in a few bit of fundie puritan appeasement.

you can spin it any way you like, all the cute rhetoric about having a say in the system, choosing a side, playing your card... they both are anti my world and gridlock is the BEST possible outcome... i cant vote for a "decrease in crap" because its not on the menu, its irrelevant.

im not such a loon within my own local area but my local area is a voice in the wilderness against the big burbs of the big cities, my issues are not relevant to federal politics.

i hate giving either side consent, tho this election i might be forced to against my better judgement... ill play dou's card and do the full steam ahead on police state overkill hoping it reaches too far... atleast i might get to keep my house going.

[cdgt]

well in my world i get to choose between

* those that want to bring in lots of new taxes and restrictions and standards that price me out of my own existence to save the world from c02 whilst neglecting to do anything about the environmental problems i actually do believe in (deforestation and water management) whilst sneeking in a bit of union/corporate appeasement.

* those that want to hype up the war on terrror and war on drugs and increase the police state and fear politics whilst sneeking in a few bit of fundie puritan appeasement.

you can spin it any way you like, all the cute rhetoric about having a say in the system, choosing a side, playing your card... they both are anti my world and gridlock is the BEST possible outcome... i cant vote for a "decrease in crap" because its not on the menu, its irrelevant.

im not such a loon within my own local area but my local area is a voice in the wilderness against the big burbs of the big cities, my issues are not relevant to federal politics.

i hate giving either side consent, tho this election i might be forced to against my better judgement... ill play dou's card and do the full steam ahead on police state overkill hoping it reaches too far... atleast i might get to keep my house going.

^ Bravo.

[monster_gardener]

well in my world i get to choose between

* those that want to bring in lots of new taxes and restrictions and standards that price me out of my own existence to save the world from c02 whilst neglecting to do anything about the environmental problems i actually do believe in (deforestation and water management) whilst sneeking in a bit of union/corporate appeasement.

* those that want to hype up the war on terrror and war on drugs and increase the police state and fear politics whilst sneeking in a few bit of fundie puritan appeasement.

you can spin it any way you like, all the cute rhetoric about having a say in the system, choosing a side, playing your card... they both are anti my world and gridlock is the BEST possible outcome... i cant vote for a "decrease in crap" because its not on the menu, its irrelevant.

im not such a loon within my own local area but my local area is a voice in the wilderness against the big burbs of the big cities, my issues are not relevant to federal politics.

i hate giving either side consent, tho this election i might be forced to against my better judgement... ill play dou's card and do the full steam ahead on police state overkill hoping it reaches too far... atleast i might get to keep my house going.

Thank you Very Much for your post, Noddy.

war on drugs

IMVHO that's one of the real BAD tools they use....... Maybe the worst.......

And it's hard to keep track of who is going to be bad on it.........

Would have hoped that Pres. Obama the ex-Coke Head of State would be tolerant of "medical" Mary Jane but Noooooooooo........

He's acting like a reformed Whore against the Californicator's medical marijuana....... ONLY the Fudds get to do anything principle.........

PAT ROBERTSON!!! is the one saying it's time end the Drug War


Curious what is the status of cold medicine in Oz.........

Getting to be that here it may be more dangerous to buy Sudafed at a pharmacy than marijuana from a dealer*

http://www.theagitator.com/2009/09/28/h ... edication/

And the Perps in Power say that it's "For the children" when they lock Grandma up for buying too much cold medicine for the grandkids..........

Last March, Sally Harpold, an Indiana grandmother of triplets, bought two boxes of cold medication in less than a week. Together, the two boxes contained 3.6 grams of pseudoephedrine, putting her in violation of the state’s methamphetamine-fighting law, which forbids the purchase of more than three grams by one person in a seven-day period.

Police came to Harpold’s home, arrested and handcuffed her, and booked her in a Vermillion County jail. No one believes Harpold was making meth or aiding anyone who was. But local authorities aren’t apologizing for her arrest.

“I don’t want to go there again,” [Vermillion County Prosecutor Nina] Alexander told the Tribune-Star, recalling how the manufacture and abuse of methamphetamine ravaged the tiny county and its families.

While the law was written with the intent of stopping people from purchasing large quantities of drugs to make methamphetamine, the law does not say the purchase must be made with the intent to make meth.

“The law does not make this distinction,” Alexander said…

Just as with any law, the public has the responsibility to know what is legal and what is not, and ignorance of the law is no excuse, the prosecutor said.

“I’m simply enforcing the law as it was written,” Alexander said…

It is up to customers to pay attention to their purchase amounts, and to check medication labels, Alexander said.

“If you take these products, you ought to know what’s in them,” she said.

Why don't we just replace this 2 legged BITCH with a robot

Hasn't she ever heard of prosecutorial discretion.....

Vigo County Sheriff Jon Marvel to (unintentionally) put an exclamation point on the absurdity.

“Sometimes mistakes happen,” Marvel said. “It’s unfortunate. But for the good of everyone, the law was put into effect.

“I feel for her, but if she could go to one of the area hospitals and see a baby born to a meth-addicted mother …”

Because clearly the best way to prevent meth-addicted babies is to arrest women who buy cold medication for their grandchildren.

Another reason to be suspicious of Romney......... LDS Mormons are against even coffee and tea!!!

Another Atrocity from Alabama.......... Even worse...........

http://freedominourtime.blogspot.com/20 ... ounty.html

2 legged Son of a Bitch this time........

Sgt. Sorenon teaches everyone that the police are NOT your friend.......


*don't know, have never done, too much danger of confiscation laws....

[Enki]

I see this a lot these days but I'm not sure where one goes with it. It has no solution: neither party nor gridlock solve the above, so why would it change one's voting behavior?

IOW, if the game is rigged, but it's the only one in town, what good does it do not to play, and lose your only shot?

Correct, gridlock doesn't solve the problem. Gridlock is merely the least bad of all possible outcomes.

No, it isn't at all. It's the most oppressive of all possible outcomes.

^ Blatantly false. Can you not think of any possible outcome, any historical outcome, more oppressive than the current gridlock in the U.S. government?

The point is that we cannot alter any of the stupid genuflecting things that have already been implemented if there is gridlock. Hate the TSA patdowns? Too bad, can't alter it. Don't want TSA to get more invasive? Too bad, we can't alter it. You have this really dangerously naive belief that the things the government does cannot get worse within gridlock. It's the opposite of what is true, the fact is they can only get worse. All of the conditions for true tyranny exist and we are at the top of the slippery slope with all of those things. In fact, you may have noticed that the only things that enjoy bipartisan support are the ending of civil liberties. So what we are going to end up with is a system with no security and no freedom.

• Psssst. You're shrieking.

Pssst you're idioting.

[Enki]

noddy I don't know how Australia is structured but here in America the local has power to safeguard against the Federal. But the first line of political engagement that people in America give up is power over the local. They will spend hundreds of hours a year in an election year arguing ill-informed opinions about the Presidential election, but they don't even know who their local representative is. The Sheriff has to be notified if the FBI is going to investigate in his county. The local City Council can determine how the local PD is funded, the Mayor can choose who the local chief of police is. All of those are safeguards against the War on Drugs and War on Terror.

The end of the War on Drugs is MOST DEFINITELY on the menu. I know based on some pretty good intel from people directly involved that they are moving toward scaling it back in Latin America. All sorts of things that seem not on the menu now will be on the menu ten years from now. That's why being involved is important.

Usually the person who is cynical about their own involvement doesn't want to be involved because they want to have MORE power than the average person, they cannot handle that they are just one voice and that their opinion does carry weight but it only carries as much weight as it does. In Australia you are one out of 20m, but that's still one out of 20m. When you scale it back locally your voice starts to carry more weight. For my part being involved locally I see behind the curtain and see how small a percentage of the population actually drives the discourse. I have observed directly how Occupy Wall Street has been able to change the national conversation and particularly the conversation within the Democratic party.

[cdgt]

I see this a lot these days but I'm not sure where one goes with it. It has no solution: neither party nor gridlock solve the above, so why would it change one's voting behavior?

IOW, if the game is rigged, but it's the only one in town, what good does it do not to play, and lose your only shot?

Correct, gridlock doesn't solve the problem. Gridlock is merely the least bad of all possible outcomes.

No, it isn't at all. It's the most oppressive of all possible outcomes.

^ Blatantly false. Can you not think of any possible outcome, any historical outcome, more oppressive than the current gridlock in the U.S. government?

The point is that we cannot alter any of the stupid genuflecting things that have already been implemented if there is gridlock. Hate the TSA patdowns? Too bad, can't alter it. Don't want TSA to get more invasive? Too bad, we can't alter it. You have this really dangerously naive belief that the things the government does cannot get worse within gridlock. It's the opposite of what is true, the fact is they can only get worse.

The point is that you made a really, really stupid shriek with "the most oppressive of all possible outcomes."

I don't suppose it's ever occurred to you that the TSA emerged as a bi-partisan "alteration" that by-passed gridlock? Try this:

• You have this dangerously naive belief that the alterations government makes only make things better. It's the opposite of what is true, the fact is they very often* get worse.
  
  * Because I don't shriek, I don't overstake my case by saying they can only get worse.

All of the conditions for true tyranny exist and we are at the top of the slippery slope with all of those things. In fact, you may have noticed that the only things that enjoy bipartisan support are the ending of civil liberties. So what we are going to end up with is a system with no security and no freedom.

^ Did you actually pay attention to what you just wrote? Sounds to me like you oppose bipartisan intiatives by government that end civil liberties. There is only one way to prevent bipartisanship. Welcome to my side, Tinker. Say it with me,

• Viva Gridlock!

• Psssst. You're shrieking.

Pssst you're idioting.

Welcome aboard!

[Ibrahim]

well in my world i get to choose between

* those that want to bring in lots of new taxes and restrictions and standards that price me out of my own existence to save the world from c02 whilst neglecting to do anything about the environmental problems i actually do believe in (deforestation and water management) whilst sneeking in a bit of union/corporate appeasement.

* those that want to hype up the war on terrror and war on drugs and increase the police state and fear politics whilst sneeking in a few bit of fundie puritan appeasement.

you can spin it any way you like, all the cute rhetoric about having a say in the system, choosing a side, playing your card... they both are anti my world and gridlock is the BEST possible outcome... i cant vote for a "decrease in crap" because its not on the menu, its irrelevant.

You're omitting another option. Yes, you can operate within the political system for one "side" or party or another, all of whom may be repugnant, or you can oppose and try to replace the system altogether. Or you can do nothing, and not even try ("gridlock"). The citizen who supports "gridlock" is mere cattle. Political driftwood who will float on whatever currents he encounters.

[Mr. Perfect]

Romney scores another lead. He can definitely win.


http://www.gallup.com/poll/150743/Obama-Romney.aspx

[Enki]

cgdt Your system requires ideological perfection, it's not pragmatic. It assumes that we'll have gridlock 100% of the time, but that's not going to happen. Your methods of imperfect Gridlock ensure that it only gets worse as people define their hopes for political outcomes based around the notion of Gridlock. It ensures that lawmakers are the MOST cynical of all people. It is a sure-fire way to make sure that the shittiest aspects of our system win.

I don't hate Democracy. So I cannot believe in that viewpoint.

Your strategy is purely reactive, not proactive at all. The proactive always win in the end. If you cannot articulate a positive vision for the future, then you're done.

[cdgt]

cgdt Your system requires ideological perfection, it's not pragmatic. It assumes that we'll have gridlock 100% of the time, but that's not going to happen. Your methods of imperfect Gridlock ensure that it only gets worse as people define their hopes for political outcomes based around the notion of Gridlock. It ensures that lawmakers are the MOST cynical of all people. It is a sure-fire way to make sure that the shittiest aspects of our system win.

I don't hate Democracy. So I cannot believe in that viewpoint.

Your strategy is purely reactive, not proactive at all. The proactive always win in the end. If you cannot articulate a positive vision for the future, then you're done.

My system acknowledges that ideological perfection is impossible, which means it is entirely pragmatic.

It does not assume 100% gridlock at all. We're sliding into oblivion. That is the pragmatic reality. People who want more centralized authority (both sides) are greasing the skids. I want to see them impeded. I could wish for more, but all I see is sheep and shrieking sheep who get hung up over pet words, articulation and visions.

Gridlock won't make things worse, it is the bipartisan defeats of gridlock that have and will make things worse.

Lawmakers are already the most cynical of all people. And those "aspects" of our system are already winning.

If gridlock is the will of the people, and the people want divided goverment (historically true in the US btw), gridlock is the pure outcome of democracy.

All political strategies are reactive, reactive to the status quo. The proactive will not always win. If articulating a positive vision for the future was winning, then progressive leftists would have already won. You haven't won, and you can't win. If you could win, you would've already won. But around the world, progressive leftists are being reactive, grasping for the same flawed tools for a slightly different brand of flawed monkeys, thinking that this time their pure motives will achieve a different result. Naïveté and hubris at best. Cynicism on stilts by the leaders thereof.

If you think "articulating a positive vision" (a.k.a. lying about the present and the future) is going to materially improve jack squat, then you have already lost.

What is needed is outside the box thinking. Social progressives can't imagine another way than aping their ostensible opponents. It's really hilarious to watch, I can only muster so much pity. If you want a theological parallel, the sin of Satan was "... I will be like the Most High." Not "better than the Most High." Just "like the Most High." The left has created a god out of the "wealthy and powerful minority" to nearly tin foil hat levels where their highest goal and act of worship is to merely replace them in their present role. Pathetic.