Fuck you.

Andrew Cuomo started sounding like another DNCbot as soon as he got the nomination. Useless, and will never lead on this.

This NYer wants marijuana completely legalized.

I work at a large plaintiffs-side lawfirm in NYC. Dem/DNC bigs make regular appearances here to push their candidates and collect checks.

When they come, one of the elevators is commandeered for them. They’re taken directly to the “executive lounge” on the top floor, to which we plebes do not have access. There, they are regaled, wined and dined and given checks to do the bidding of our capitalist-class partners. They don’t stop along the way to get our opinion, or even whatever support we can offer, despite the fact that the vast majority of our staff identify as D voters and many have given money to D campaigns in the past. These people from the D party-they don’t care what we think. It doesn’t matter because it isn’t accompanied by a giant “contribution” or a connection to another “somebody.” There is no way for us plebes to move them. Fact.

Good perspective-duly noted. I don’t agree with everything you say there, but a constructive dialog along these lines is exactly what we need.

I’d say there are still some conflicts worth taking part in, as ultimately they will never go away. But conflict doesn’t mean an acrimonious zero-sum game. And struggling for a better situation doesn’t absolve of us our responsibility to take care of ourselves and one another. Both can be done at the same time. I appreciate the number of constructive, civil debates and arguments I’ve had with political and cultural conservatives over the last few years. I put much of the little hope I have for this country in the fact that I seem to be able to have more and more of these as a lot of R-loyalist types I know have come to be as critical of their party as real progressives now are of the Ds. Unfortunately, countervailing against that is the rank intransigence and self-importance of the “middle” that have been pandered to for as long as I’ve been able to follow politics. I find they are the ones most resistant to finding novel solutions, as in their arrogance they think they’ve found the one true way and just shake their heads at those of us who continue to hope for ponies…

I’ve never really understood why I’m supposed to be upset with Romney being hard-to-even-conceive rich as compared to Obama being I-can-imagine-it-but-no-way-in-hell-I’ll-ever-have-that-much rich. And so on for lots of political races.

They’re all rich. So rich that I entertain no fantasies that they understand my existence.

But then I don’t toss Marx in the garbage every time some journalist tells me how I should think about the socioeconomic status of various pols.

I am not particularly interested in Mr. Obama’s personal opinion on marriage for same sex couple-no more so than I’m interested in anyone’s personal opinion of it. As someone who might influence policy, his opinion is particularly important. Since he made it clear that his position doesn’t translate to him trying to do anything about it (leave it to the states; continue to refuse to sign that executive order), I kinda don’t give a shit about this.

Good on him for having what I consider a fair position, but then I don’t pat the guy next to me at work on the back for not being an asshole; therefore I don’t feel the need to lavish praise on Obama for this.

And yet only the guy on the other side sites specifics.

What did Bush/Cheney/Rove do that you think the Obama administration hasn’t done or wouldn’t consider?

Absolutely. Our institution of marriage here in the west has its roots in the Roman ritual. It was not a religious insitution originally. Historically marriage is first and foremost about regulating the devolution of property and offices from one generation to the next. Christianity usurped this function of civil society-understandably, as the church took on the rump of responsibilities formerly handled by the Roman “state” that was left after the disengagement of the curial class from tax collection and redistribution.

Dude, you’re on fire. Great posts.

No, voting for them MAY, even LIKELY will not make any difference.

Voting D or R is what’s GUARANTEED to make NO difference. Fact.

Yeah, just to put a fine point on it, I think what’s meant is the stuff from TBogg and Pam Spaulding, for example, that is on the front page here daily-all of it suggesting the problems in our politics stem exclusively from Republicans.

Hmmmm…I’m interested. Tell me more!

Your last sentence is just as true if you substitute “Obama” for “Romney”. I’ll likely vote for neither.

If your response to this were: we’re f’ed either way, we’d have some common ground. But I doubt that.

I’ve had the same thought. Kinda gives the lie to the entire “2nd Ammendment first” movement.

Roy Hodgson’s speech impediment is barely noticable anyway.

No, and I think he makes this clear, he’s just pointing out that partisan propaganda is a fetid load of shit, from either side.

The deficit fear-mongering has nothing to do with the deficit. It is only an excuse to justify cutting programs that help regular people.

And you’re only calling out republicans on this? Really?

Completely agree with wbgonne @ 4. What’s happened to FDL over this election year is truly tragic.

So I guess I’m also with bafflebrains @ 19.

The one where he gives half a shit about what liberals or progressives think or where he cares about the rule of law or where he’s not completely beholden to corporations, the very rich and the military/intelligence community.

I wish he were a socialist or a Marxist.

The vision of him held by most who comment here is about as close to reality, though.