neither of them can change a damn thing because of the presidential directives bush passed into law that says new administration is not allowed to disagree with previous admin's policies. so it's just four more years of bush and cheney since nobody is willing to go against the patriot act and other associated bad laws.
...so if none of the candidates will be allowed to end the war(s) started by bush, why should i vote for any of them? war is against everything i believe in.
why don't they just outlaw the manufacture of assault rifles?
does anybody really need a gun designed for war?
(our grease-palmed lawmakers are too afraid to go there)
why do we tolerate these cowards and murderous thugs?
did that lone shooter kill all those people with a semi-automatic?
with a fifteen-round clip? how many reloads would that mean?
or was he using something deadlier, something already illegal?
do the existing laws comfort the dead, dying, and grieving?
would it be insensitive to point out we've heard this song before?
is anybody listening? or just singing along with the crowd?
if you sing long enough and loud enough will you believe it too?
why does it surprise me when people's minds slam shut, like they always do? and why do i always feel like the bad guy whether i back down from the fight or not? why can't they see it's a game nobody ever wins? none of the options being presented to us represent any kind of real decision, nor any kind of real change. and yeah, b'gawd, i did double space after my periods. because it reads better that way. maybe we all just need to pause a little bit longer...
we were so close to coming out of the dark alley, they felt a need to knock us all over the heads and drag us back in it. if voting equals good government, explain why there isn't one. argh. they can't possibly believe the stuff they spew.
how convenient it must be to forget how much you always hate on christians when you quote MLK, leave off the reverend part and call him a doctor instead. your mindsplit is showing, check your programming. *****
"A final problem that mankind must solve in order to survive in the world house that we have inherited is finding an alternative to war and human destruction. Recent events have vividly reminded us that nations are not reducing but rather increasing their arsenals of weapons of mass destruction. The best brains in the highly developed nations of the world are devoted to military technology. The proliferation of nuclear weapons has not been halted, in spite of the limited-test-ban treaty. In this day of man’s highest technical achievement, in this day of dazzling discovery, of novel opportunities, loftier dignities and fuller freedoms for all, there is no excuse for the kind of blind craving for power and resources that provoked the wars of previous generations. There is no need to fight for food and land. Science has provided us with adequate means of survival and transportation, which make it possible to enjoy the fullness of this great earth. The question now is, do we have the morality and courage required to live together as brothers and not be afraid?" last part from The World House, 1967