Browse By

Vote Liberal In 2016

Over the next 22 months, there are going to be a lot of corporations and wealthy families spending a lot of money to convince you that you need to be afraid. They’ll tell you that you need to be afraid of Muslims and Mexicans, of Ebola and of health care, of science and of clean energy, of working Americans asking for a fair day’s work. They’ll tell you that you should be afraid of people getting married, and of uppity protesters, and of public schools.

Is that how you want to live? Do you really want to live with that much fear in your life?

usa vote liberal bumper stickerI don’t think it’s fair for me to try to tell anyone that there’s only one possible route of progress for the USA. I can’t honestly preach that any one political party will be the ticket to a better future, or that any single candidate must be elected to save our country.

What I can say is that any political candidate who promotes conservative principles will strengthen the trend of the shrinking of America’s vision. What I can do is to encourage all Americans, as we move toward the presidential primary season, to look frankly at all presidential candidates from all political parties, and compare them to the expansive, optimistic vision of a truly liberal mindset.

Whichever vehicle you favor, whether it’s the Democratic Party, the Green Party, or a vigorous independent candidacy, Vote Liberal in 2016.

9 thoughts on “Vote Liberal In 2016”

  1. DrRGP says:

    Do Libertarians count?

    1. J Clifford says:

      Given that Libertarians support policies that lead inevitably to oligarchy and therefore, loss of freedom to corporate overlords, no, Libertarians do NOT count. Libertarians are to liberals what National Socialists are to socialists.

  2. Stephen Kent Gray says:

    Why is there no mention of the Socialist Party USA or Dean Capone? The Socialist Party USA is big enough for the Political Compass to put it on the chart each time.

    2004: Compare Walt Brown to Ralph Nader and David Cobb
    2008: Compare Brian Moore to Ralph Nader and Cynthia McKinney
    2012: Compare Stweart Alexander to Jill Stein

    Back to 2012: Stweart Alexander was at -5,-2 while Jill Stein was at -3,-3
    Back to 2008: Brain Moore between -8 and -9, between -3 and -4 while Ralph Nader was at between -4 and -5, between -3 and -4 while Cynthia McKinney was at between -3 and -4, between -2 and -3
    Back to 2004: Basically the same as 2008, but with different names and Ralph Nader as Ralph Nader

  3. Charles Manning says:

    “Conservative” is the best indicator of political leaning. I avoid voting for anyone who even hits at being conservative. The only exceptions: a couple of friends in local elections not running against better candidates. “Liberal” doesn’t connote the the political leaning with the same reliability. Just calling oneself “liberal,” or being described as such, isn’t the same as possessing “the expansive, optimistic vision of a truly liberal mindset.” You have to look deeper to see if that’s there.

    1. Charles Manning says:

      I meant “hints,” not “hits.” [When are you guys going to allow editing comments?!]

    2. Stephen Kent Gray says:

      That’s because liberal can mean different types of liberal: classical, conservative, democratic, green, feminist, intenrationalist, libertarian, market, national, neo, ordo, paleo, religious, and secular as adjectives. Classical versus social is the major divide.

  4. WyldCherry says:

    “…loss of freedom to corporate overlords…

    Gee, I’d kind of like corporate overlords to lose freedom every once in a while.

    1. J Clifford says:

      Wyld, loss of freedom TO corporate overlords is not the same thing as loss of freedom FOR corporate overlords. Libertarians seek to dismantle all the protections we have in place against abuses by the rich and powerful – and frankly, those protections are already too weak. In the place of what protections for the little guy exist, they expect us to have faith in market dynamics and the idea that working people struggling to make ends meet will be able to fairly contest the resources of well-provisioned corporate committees of lawyers.

      That scheme is about as illiberal as anything I can think of.

  5. Tom says:

    Hey, d’ja see this?

    http://www.washingtonsblog.com/2015/01/martin-luther-king-assassinated-us-govt-king-family-civil-trial-verdict.html

    Martin Luther King assassinated by US Govt: King Family civil trial verdict

    Coretta Scott King: “We have done what we can to reveal the truth, and we now urge you as members of the media, and we call upon elected officials, and other persons of influence to do what they can to share the revelation of this case to the widest possible audience.” – King Family Press Conference, Dec. 9, 1999.

    Dr. Martin Luther King’s family and personal friend/attorney, William F. Pepper, won a civil trial that found US government agencies guilty of assassination/wrongful death. The 1999 trial, King Family versus Jowers and Other Unknown Co-Conspirators, is the only trial ever conducted on the assassination of Dr. King. The King Center fully documents the case, with full trial transcript.

    The overwhelming evidence of US government complicity found valid by the jury includes:

    US 111th Military Intelligence Group were at Dr. King’s location during the assassination.
    20th Special Forces Group had an 8-man sniper team at the assassination location on that day.
    Usual Memphis Police special body guards were advised they “weren’t needed” on the day of the assassination.
    Regular and constant police protection for Dr. King was removed from protecting Dr. King an hour before the assassination.
    Military Intelligence set-up photographers on the roof of a fire station with clear view to Dr. King’s balcony.
    Dr. King’s room was changed from a secure 1st-floor room to an exposed balcony room.
    Memphis police ordered the scene where multiple witnesses reported as the source of shooting cut down of their bushes that would have hid a sniper.
    Along with sanitizing a crime scene, police abandoned investigative procedure to interview witnesses who lived by the scene of the shooting.
    The rifle Mr. Ray delivered was not matched to the bullet that killed Dr. King, and was not sighted to accurately shoot.

    [further down the article]

    The King family believes the government’s motivation to murder Dr. King was to prevent his imminent camp-in/Occupy at Washington, D.C. until the Vietnam War was ended and those resources directed to end poverty and invest in US hard and soft infrastructure.

    US corporate media did not cover the civil trial, interview the King family, and textbooks omit this information. This is crucial evidence of a controlled corporate media rejecting coverage of a game-changing story. Journalist and author, James Douglass:

    “I can hardly believe the fact that, apart from the courtroom participants, only Memphis TV reporter Wendell Stacy and I attended from beginning to end this historic three-and-one-half week trial. Because of journalistic neglect scarcely anyone else in this land of ours even knows what went on in it. After critical testimony was given in the trial’s second week before an almost empty gallery, Barbara Reis, U.S. correspondent for the Lisbon daily Publico who was there several days, turned to me and said, ‘Everything in the U.S. is the trial of the century. O.J. Simpson’s trial was the trial of the century. Clinton’s trial was the trial of the century. But this is the trial of the century, and who’s here?’ ”

    [read the rest if interested]

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Psst... what kind of person doesn't support pacifism?

Fight the Republican beast!