Yes, the Palin candidacy worked very well for the two-party system (see the late Walter Karp’s book, “Indispensable Enemies” for how they work together to maintain an iron lock on U.S. politics) by bringing people out in droves to vote for or against such an emotionally-charged vice-presidential candidate.

So Palin is likely to be the Republican presidential nominee in 2012, but is unlikely to get more than 10% of the popular vote. Never mistake the loud voices of the political party media hacks for the voice of their voters.

In any successful election boycott, there are still 10% of the population who vote. And the government usually installs the “winners” on the basis of that 10% vote, but nobody takes them seriously or believes that they were democratically elected.

Once a government is thoroughly discredited by the refusal to vote of 90% of the population, it is easily ousted. Who willingly pays taxes to a government that only has 10% support? Who willingly fights for a government that only has 10% support? If we can successfully delegitimize our government through an election boycott, we need only avoid violence until it falls of its own accord. No free nation will recognize or extend credit to a government that has lost the support of 90% of its people.

By 2012 the Democrats will have completely betrayed their voters by not ending the wars, not stopping globalization or deregulation, not establishing a decent national heath care plan, and not investigating the Bush/Cheney cabal or 9/11. So the only thing the two-party system can do is run the most evil Republican they can in hopes that people will fall for the old “lesser evil” trick and vote for another Democratic betrayer.

The third parties, with one percent of the vote split between them all, should by then realize that they cannot be effective working within the system.

The false-flag operation of 9/11 was the basis for two wars of aggression. The military-industrial complex is planning more false flag operations as the basis for more wars. Both major parties are the puppets of the MIC, and their iron grip on Washington DC is such that no third party or independent candidates could make a difference if elected. Boycott the wars: Don’t vote!

Now let me say that as an independent I would vote for McCain in a heartbeat over that fraud Obama. You know Obama, the one that said on 6/10/08 in St. Louis that “the only bills I voted for while he was in the Senate were introduced by either Republicans or George Bush.”

BOTH Obama and McCain are for: off-shore drilling, nuclear power, the death penalty, free trade like NAFTA that sends U.S. jobs packing, more war overseas, expanding the bloated wasteful military budget, FISA, the Patriot Act, the hardline Israeli agenda, the bail-out, closed debates, etc. etc.

And remember, Obama lied about being against off-shore drilling, and being against FISA and repealing the Patriot Act only to vote for both.

You’re saying we should vote for THIS MAN?!?!?!

Please.

Nader/Gonzalez is the movement that will go beyond election day and continue on until the next election, where we will restore the government back to the people!!!

Everyone, don’t listen to her scare tactics. They said the same thing in ‘04: No not this time, vote for Kerry!
And he STILL lost.

Nader/Gonzalez ‘08
“People Fighting Back”

I do take issue with those who think that Obama might allow citizen participation in decision making. Along with all other legislators, his input from constituents ran 1,000 to 1 against the bailout, yet he still promoted it and voted for it. That is not someone who can allow himself to be influenced by those who vote for him, and those who vote for him should recognize that he was no more receptive to their pleas, nor considerate of their interests, than his opponent.

Although I consider Obama to be a more intelligent and competent person than McCain, it is obvious that Obama has a much greater vested interest in perpetuating corporate rule rather than in championing participatory democracy.

When officials tell voters, “If you elect me, then you will have more power,” it is a lie. Nothing but a lie. Casting a vote in a sham election for officials who cannot be held accountable is the act of delegating and forfeiting our power, not the struggle to become self-governing.

Democracy is not hoping that your vote might be counted towards electing somebody to make your decisions for you. Democracy is being able to share in decision making along with everyone else who will be directly impacted by those decisions.

I live in a large low-income senior building and I have some neighbors I like, some I don’t care for, and some I don’t even know. But I believe that I’d prefer any one of them to the people currently in the U.S. Congress, because every single one of my neighbors is capable of paying their rent on time, living within their means, however meager those means may be, and conducting themselves in such a way so as not to harm their neighbors. I sure can’t say that for the United States Congress, so why are some of my neighbors voting for people less competent and responsible than they themselves are, to make their decisions for them?

While there are some things that we might want others to do for us, such as rubbing our backs, cutting our hair, or making the clothes that we wear, there are some things that we cannot delegate to others, and among these things are sleeping, eating, and self-governance. It is just as absurd to elect somebody to make my decisions for me as to elect somebody to eat or sleep for me. Nobody understands our circumstances better than we do, so nobody is better qualified to make our decisions than we are.

None.

Are you one of those political hacks who gets paid by the piece to insert political blurbs online wherever possible, without regard to what they’re interjecting their propaganda into?

Everybody else who commented here, MIK, made it clear through their comments that they had read and understood the article. Political party flacks, both Democrats and Republicans, since they’re doing piece-work for the money, have neither the time nor the intellect to read what they’re disrupting.

The message your comment conveys is that Republicans are smart enough to rig elections and that Democrats are dumb enough to vote in them. Had you read and understood the article, you’d know that it doesn’t matter whether people vote or not, or whether or not their votes are stolen, because the Presidential candidates are sworn in BEFORE the popular votes are counted.

The elections are just a distraction to make people think that they have a voice when they don’t.

I’ve got no use for either of the pro-war, pro-corporate major political parties, or for the third parties and independent candidates seeking power within a totally corrupt system, but the ignorance of apathy of voters appears to be boundless, and that does interest me and I keep trying to understand it.

There will be no change under a Democratic administration, MIK. The Democrats and Republicans have already pre-funded the wars of aggression based on lies that both major party candidates are committed to, both candidates spit in the faces of 99% of their constituents and voters by supporting the bailout, and both candidates are members of the most despised Congress with the lowest approval rating in U.S. history.

Anyone who casts a third party or independent candidate vote so that their vote can be flipped to a party or candidate they oppose, holds their nose and votes for the lesser stench of two major parties guilty of crimes against humanity, or in any other way participates in a sham election where the candidates are usually sworn into office BEFORE the votes are counted, is so apathetic that they probably think that democracy means voting in sham elections.

MIK, if the government held an “election” to decide whether or not you should be tortured or killed, but it makes the decision to torture or kill you BEFORE it counts the votes, would you consider that to be democracy?

Voting, by itself, as a symbolic and meaninless ritual, is not democracy. In a democratic form of government, even a republic, the candidates can not be sworn in before the votes are counted, the way it is done here. And it is not the Republicans that make the decision to swear in candidates before the popular vote is counted. It is both Democrats and Republicans. When they ask for your vote, your volunteer time and effort, and your money to get out the vote, and then they swear in the new President without even bothering to count your vote first, doesn’t it ever occur to you that something might be seriously wrong with the system?

And if you don’t care, would you mind explaining to me why you are so apathetic?