Ishmael Reed

[Henry M]

Tracy, how can you confuse Nader's talk with actually doing anything?  Obama
talked about what he wanted to do if elected, but couldn't follow through.
 I doubt he knew how powerless the POTUS really is until he was in the White
House.

Nader is just a gadfly gassbag. If he isn't in the pay of the right, he
might as well be for all that he had "done."  He keeps people from
supporting viable candidates.  How can anyone who has the slightest idea of
deconstruction be so naive as to confuse words with action?

AsB4,
٩(●̮̮̃•̃)۶
Henry Mu
http://astore.amazon.com/tdcoccamsaxe-20


On Sun, Dec 19, 2010 at 9:12 PM, Joseph Tracy <brook7 at sover.net> wrote:

> Nobody expected the wars to end in a day but Obama expanded the war in
> Afghanistan. Other nations are leaving,  many atrocities have been revealed,
> Obama has the power to change what we are doing and he has not.  THEY are
> not the republican party. That is baby talk. The impotence you feel is
> probably from doing nothing but supporting one of the 2 war parties. Your
> assertions about Nader are crap, he has been making a difference and
> sticking to his principles for years.
>
> On Dec 19, 2010, at 7:25 PM, Henry M wrote:
>
> By childish, impractical standards, all Presidents of the US have have been
> "mass murderers," and if Ralph Nader were elected tomorrow, he would be just
> another one.  That conflation BS only helps THEM.  It leads to a
> death-spiral of impotence, which they love.
>
> AsB4,
> ٩(●̮̮̃•̃)۶
> Henry Mu
> http://astore.amazon.com/tdcoccamsaxe-20
>
>
> On Sun, Dec 19, 2010 at 2:38 PM, Joseph Tracy <brook7 at sover.net> wrote:
>
>> You may choose to vote for a mass murderer because you think his heart is
>> in the right place, but all you will accomplish is the continued reign of
>> violence.  I understand your choice but will vote for someone clearly
>> opposed to imperial warmongering , mass murder, spying without warrants
>> extraordinary rendition and the rest of the duopoly agenda. Palin works for
>> the same people Obama works for.
>>
>>
>> On Dec 15, 2010, at 5:55 AM, Henry M wrote:
>>
>> > I've been saying exactly those things, Albert, but the Nader-voting
>> lefter-than-thou crowd says that I must be a running-dog-lackey for the
>> bourgeoisie, and the right just knows that I'm a Socialist.
>> >
>> > AsB4,
>> > ٩(●̮̮̃•̃)۶
>> > Henry Mu
>> > http://astore.amazon.com/tdcoccamsaxe-20
>> >
>> >
>> > On Wed, Dec 15, 2010 at 3:33 AM, Albert Rolls <alprolls at earthlink.net>
>> wrote:
>> >
>> > Is Obama far enough to the left, perhaps in his head but not in his
>> actions. Does that mean I'm not going to vote for him if he's the guy on the
>> ticket. Hell no. I'm voting because if the left doesn't vote the right gets
>> into office and what use is that to me or anyone else, even a whole bunch of
>> people voting for the right. And to just make the contrast between Obama and
>> what you get when the left doesn't vote because the goddamn middle is what
>> used to be the right see what Obama did with the meals-for-kids program this
>> week and then remember that Reagan wanted to define ketchup as a vegetable
>> so that the meals-for-kids program in the '80s could save money by
>> substituting ketchup packages for costly vegetables. And don't think that
>> shit doesn't have a lasting effect (beyond the malnourished generation of
>> kids from low-income families that have to suffer through it. I saw a chef
>> on a cooking segment of some morning news program (a Saturday program, I
>> think) remind the audience that ketchup was a vegetable: that was less than
>> ten years ago. If the left doesn't vote because Obama is a dissapointent, we
>> get Gingrinch, Huckabee, Palin, Romney or whoever. I don't need a president
>> whose only use is to rallying people against him/her. Those people will do
>> more damage than someone whose hopes are at least pointing in the right
>> direction.
>> >
>> > -----Original Message-----
>> > >From: Michael Bailey <michael.lee.bailey at gmail.com>
>> > >Sent: Dec 15, 2010 2:41 AM
>> > >To: P-list <pynchon-l at waste.org>
>> > >Subject: Re: Ishmael Reed
>> > >
>> > >Joseph Tracy  wrote:
>> > >> Ishmael Reed may enjoy sucking on his own member participation in
>> Scam Obama, (Yes we can , If massa says it's OK). But I will not be joining
>> him.
>> > >
>> > >yeah, as a pacifist I'm disappointed in Obama, well, not really
>> > >"disappointed" because I didn't expect him to court assassination by
>> > >repudiating Bush's wars (although wouldn't that be cool! maybe they
>> > >wouldn't kill him off, who knows, it'd be a heckuva ride to try and
>> > >find out...but he never said that was his trip)
>> > >(more's the pity)
>> > >
>> > >Reed's "coolest guy in the room" isn't saying coolest guy in the world
>> > >- that'd be, like, oh, Desmond Tutu or Pharoah Sanders...somebody like
>> > >that (Tom Waits?  Thomas Pynchon's in the running too...)
>> > >
>> > >Hippest dude in a very uncool room, Obama...
>> > >
>> > >
>> > >
>> > >
>> > >
>> > >
>> > >--
>> > >"Three things in life are important. The first is to be kind.  The
>> > >second is to be kind.  And the third is to be kind." - Henry James
>> >
>> >
>>
>>
>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://waste.org/pipermail/pynchon-l/attachments/20101220/64e29f75/attachment.html>