[quote="jimmie d killed the forum"][b]When you write fucked up shit like this, baddy,[/b]
[quote="baddy"]I'll cry about the children you've been voting to kill.[/quote]
[b]you may as well expect to get smacked around a bit.[/b][/quote]

It might be better to begin with the complete quote so it’s not out of context:
[quote="baddy"]
[color=blue][b]You've managed to knock Ron Paul and Mike Gravel, and now Dennis Kucinich, the only three antiwar candidates from the two big parties, and you've knocked them all. Antiwar people need to be [i]buildng up [/i]support for the antiwar candidates, telling our friends to vote for them, not knocking them[/b][/color] and telling our friends that there's no hope, that we must "face it" and accept the likes of Hillary vs Rudy.

You go ahead and laugh about the UFO distraction, (and you keep trying to discredit this good man), I'll cry about the children you've been voting to kill.[/quote]

Dear Jimmie-d,

Around two million Iraqi's have died in recent years, approximately one million due to Clinton-Gore's eight years of bombing and sanctions, followed by another million under the Bush-Cheney administration. Unfortunately we're not allowed to see our brothers dying on television, hence it seems a little less real I’m sure to Americans casting pro-war votes, (votes for pro-war candidates). Every taxpaying American is paying through the nose in taxes to kill our brothers abroad for elitist goals (hence the bombs are falling "in our name"), and most voting Americans (through the magic of programmed ignorance and patches of denial), use lesser evilism to consistently vote pro war….just the way the elite need them to. This is why we have wars and all the other ailments that benefit the rich few, on the backs of everyone else.

I'll back up what I said above, that you have been voting to kill children...consistently since I’ve know you, and it appears to be happening again.
[quote="baddy"](And Jimmie, in regards to my statement you quoted above...I wouldn't say something I couldn't back up).[/quote]

There's a reason they call it lesser evil, and that's because it's evil. Maybe best to start with my definition of evil so folks know where I'm coming from: If someone does something for personal gain and later discovers that other's got hurt as a result, [I]and the person learns to not do that again,[/I] that is not evil, that is a mistake. If someone does something for personal gain [b]that he knows ahead of time[/b] will hurt others, and goes ahead and does it anyway, that is evil.

These days, voting for even the so-called lesser evil candidates not only gets hundreds of thousands of our brothers killed abroad (for personal gain of a few at the top), but it also insures deepening economic hardship at home as Americans become deeper in debt to pay for the military and wars(as has happened in empire after empire before ours), and more enslaved to the elite, those who 2/3rds of the top tier politicians also serve, (Wall Street, and in turn the central banks at the top).

I voted for Clinton-Gore in the first time, that was a mistake. What would it have been if I'd voted for them a second time, after discovering they had killed hundreds of thousands of my brothers during their first term? After seeing they had killed hundreds of thousands in their first four years, it would have been evil for me to vote for another four years of their killing, (that they went on to greatly intensify in their second term)….for me to vote Clinton-Gore knowing that others were going to get hurt would have been evil, albeit to some the hypothetical “lesser” evil.

And that's just "lesser evil" and Iraq, the evil of spreading hardship for personal gain generally extends to home as well, for example they fought hard to get the elite gifted with accelerated outsourcing, greatly streamlined through the installation of NAFTA and the WTO for the benefit of their sponsors. If people die at home of starvation or lack of medical, that is equally as tragic as a Lockheed Martin bomb arriving in an Iraqi (or Palestinian), bedroom.
The opposite of lesser evil voting means we must vigorously support the NON-evil candidates (which we often see going on around the Zappa forum), and just as vigorously reject [i]all[/i] of the evil candidates, 100% rejection of them, all of the time. Evil depends that we cave in, lower our morals, and keep voting evil it into power....as [url=http://counterpunch.org/walsh12262007.html]JOHN WALSH QUOTED[/url] Lawrence O'Donnell:
[quote="L O'Donnell"]YOU MUST, YOU MUST show them that you're capable of not voting for them. If you don't show them you're capable of not voting for them, they don't have to listen to you. I promise you that. I worked within the Democratic Party. I didn't listen, or have to listen, to anything on the left while I was working in the Democratic Party, because the left had nowhere to go."[/quote]
So Jimmie, to back up my statement above, I’ll use your own words to show your support of specific candidates, briefly state why voting for them was known to be "voting to kill children," then put links to further proof on other web pages so people can click on it if want to, or not, (in order to shorten this post).
__________________________________________________
I should mention that I came to the forum around 2003, and with respect to presidential candidates, I've only seen you support leading Democrats, and they have been about killing children, (among other injustices).
[b]Voting for children killing in 2000:[/b]
Here's a statement about Gore, it's in reference to my voting for Nader (I have no ability to vote for a candidate like Gore). I post it to show your support for the Gore-Lieberman ticket.
[img]http://znakomi.com/zappaforum/2007/JDpost/JDwantingGOER.jpg[/img]
The problem is Gore had already been Clinton’s frontman for eight years on the Iraq bombing/starvation project, a million people had already died by 2000. We were [b]already eight years into[/b] "this mess" as you put it), with regards to Iraq, (not to mention the Clinton-Gore non-Congressionally authorized interventions, wars, and bombings in Afghanistan, Bosnia, Colombia, Haiti, Somalia, Sudan, and Yugoslavia that also had no UN resolution and hence were unconstitutional and broke International Law). With a million killings already under Gore’s belt, it wasn't too likely that I was going to be voting for a "less evil" Gore-Lieberman ticket. that's doing something that I know ahead of time will result in a lot of people getting hurt. [url=http://znakomi.com/zappaforum/2007/JDpost/jdpostgorelieberman.htm]PROOF HERE[/url].
Related to Gore, but a little off the topic: I thought this post from you in early 2004 was interesting. In it you seem to be saying that Nader did not “give” Bush the presidency. I believe your first instincts were correct on this, and that you were right when you first wrote:
[img]http://znakomi.com/zappaforum/2007/JDpost/GorelostfairandsquareJD.jpg[/img]
This opinion seemed to change in the following year (I’m guessing as the Democrat propaganda machine got rolling on villanizing Nader), We "goobers" as you put it (ridicule when substance can’t be attacked), were voting against evil with Nader, over a proposed escallation of violence with Kerry. The Democrats spent millions on their attack campaign against Nader, (and Air America helped spread the tool of evil, ignorance) ...
[img]http://znakomi.com/zappaforum/2007/JDpost/gooberfear.jpg[/img]
[url=http://znakomi.com/zappaforum/2007/donahueonnader.htm]AND BTW[/url]
But back to the main topic…
[b]Voting for children killing in 2004:[/b]
In the next elections, lesser evil voting remained the operative as you pushed for, and voted for, an escalation of violence in Iraq in Kerry's promise to "fight a smarter war," and "bring victory in the war on terror" and so on, by sending two more divisions immediately into Baghdad, and adding 40, 000 to the military, (this was before "surge" was a dirty word). I was posting many articles on the danger of John Kerry to Iraqi's, and to American's here at home, yet lesser evilism, by nature, must be blind the children that will die as a result of it’s votes.
[url=http://znakomi.com/zappaforum/2007/JDpost/jdpostkerry.htm]PROOF HERE[/url]
To many people, their candidate’s position on war and it’s killing is number one on their list of priorities when considering a candidate. But a lesser evil voter settling on a pro-war candidate has the problem of having to overlook the killing they are voting for in order to avoid admitting that when the going gets tuff, they don’t stand up for their brothers who are being bombed in other lands.
In the case of your voting for Kerry, I was posting much information about his intended surge and escalation of violence and I asked you about your pro Kerry vote, “How do you justify Kerry’s escalation of the violence referred to in his plans above?”
The answer I received was remarkable, it simply blots out any need to take a position on Kerry and the war. IMHO, most people consider very highly on the list their candidates position on the war. I can only guess that when voting for violence, blocking it out is necessary…but that’s a guess. 
[Img] http://znakomi.com/zappaforum/2007/JDpost/KerryKillingDenial.jpg[/img]
Here is the same thing another way, put a label on it and you don’t have to look at it…
[img] http://znakomi.com/zappaforum/2007/JDpost/cuckooclocktodeadbabyquestion.jpg[/img]
Through the magic of lesser evilism (and it’s associated denial), we looked at the same reality, differently:
[img] http://znakomi.com/zappaforum/2007/JDpost/domath1.jpg[/img]
[img] http://znakomi.com/zappaforum/2007/JDpost/domath2.jpg[/img]

Not everyone is lesserevil, someday our numbers mag be enough to out vote lesser evil, and the evil will stop.
[img] http://znakomi.com/zappaforum/2007/JDpost/BplusKequalsnochange.jpg[/img]
[img] http://znakomi.com/zappaforum/2007/JDpost/dropbishdropkerry.jpg[/img]

I could see yours and what was missing from it, you couldn’t (or wouldn’t), see what was missing from yours…Kerry’s surge of two divisions immediately into Baghdad = more killing.

Once all moneyed candidates promote war, the war is essentially accepted, and the next less important issue becomes the differentiator.

<<PUT IN ABOUT THIS BEING FIRST POLITICAL QUESTION AND MIGHT BE THE LAST ONE OF MINE YOU EVER ANSWERED..put in PHOTO of JD answering that he wouldn't form an opinion of Kerry and the war...denial...>>
<<WE SAW THE ELECTION DIFFERENT WAYSput in blackboard photos, B+K=WAR>>
<<POSSIBLY PUT IN CLIP ITS GETTING UGLY OUT THERE>>

<PUT IN ABOUT JD NOT BEING ABLE TO DEFEND AIR AMERICA>>>YET @ WEEKS LATER RECOMMENDING IT AS A PLACE TO LEARN "THE TRUTH.">>>