Pledging money to support alternative candidates is not so smart. by Bytemite

REAL WORLD EVENT DISCUSSIONS

Pledging money to support alternative candidates is not so smart.

POSTED BY: BYTEMITE
UPDATED: Wednesday, March 3, 2010 17:22
SHORT URL:
VIEWED: 1099
PAGE 1 of 1

Monday, March 1, 2010 8:31 AM

Well, I'm a DUMBASS. And naive. And apparently so are the people at moveon.org

Okay, so I subscribed to moveon.org to help me keep an eye on the health care thing, and here and there, when I was hopeful I might actually make a difference, I contributed money, and even signed up for a pledge to contribute to the campaigns of anyone who would kick out those damn Blue Dog Democrats that I hate. Dicks aren't bipartisan, they're spineless weasels who just take whatever stance they think will get them their next paycheck, and I want them out of office. Okay, I'm thinking, this sounds like a good idea.

THIS is who you want me to contribute money to? THIS?!

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bill_Halter

Quote:
Currently, Bill Halter is a member of the Board of Directors of two public companies in biotechnology and information technology: Threshold Pharmaceuticals...and Akamai Technologies...He previously served on the Board of InterMune,.. Xenogen,...and webMethods."

Do you people at moveon.org LISTEN to yourselves?! Am I the only sane person in the ROOM?! I mean, I didn't even have to dig deep to find that! Are you just so blinded by ideology and pushing this bill through that you would vote in someone from the PHARMACEUTICAL INDUSTRY?! FJHKJHALIYT!

/rant

And now, my bullshit conscience is telling me that I made a promise and I should keep it.

But you know what? Either they're too stupid to do any good in what they're trying to accomplish, or they're right in with all the other sharks. I'm willing to take that personal blow to my ego, reputation, and pride, if it means I don't support IDIOCY like this. They will NOT be getting my money. Also,

@ moveon.org. I do not take kindly to being tricked.

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Monday, March 1, 2010 8:37 AM

NIKI2

Gettin' old, but still a hippie at heart...

Uh, no problem with ranting, and I kinda understand what you're saying, but I'm confused. Did MoveOn ask you to donate to this guy? You didn't say...

If so, yeah, screw 'em. I don't get any e-mails that I don't solicit, so I'm sure I miss some things. But when it comes to politics, if I want to back somebody or be part of an issue, I check it out myself. There are too many influences in EVERY group to trust, seems to me!

Sorry you got screwed, hope you either didn't already contribute or it wasn't much!

"I'm just right. Kinda like the sun rising in the east and the world being round...its not a need its just the way it is." The Delusional "Hero", 3/1/10

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Monday, March 1, 2010 11:37 AM

BYTEMITE

No, not this time, not directly, and I don't think they can make me pay my pledge.

But now and then when they presented something that did sound worthwhile, I did donate some money. I thought that I would be putting that into a specific fund of money for that particular cause, but now I'm thinking that's doubtful, and also I've probably been indirectly accidentally supporting causes I don't like.

So yeah, to hell with them. I'm constantly getting burned by both our political system and political activism. At this point my thinking is, people who believe in the system can go right on trying to make change within it and donating and voting, but I've had it, and I'm not participating any more. I'm going back to plain old figuring out ways to expose corruption and undermine.

I've thought ever since I came to these boards that Frem had the right idea, that it was pointless to trust any of these people who have such personal stakes and biases. And every time I'm convinced by people who are more government friendly to give participation another try, I get stung. And if they can afford that, sting the hands of people who would reach out to them while they're dangling off a cliff, then let 'em fall. I'm done. And even more interested in thinking of ways to screw their shit up now. Maybe I'll start circulating a mass mailer to constituents in that area destroying this candidate. I wonder what I'd need to do that.

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Monday, March 1, 2010 5:43 PM

FREMDFIRMA

Not a whole lot.

Thing is, that's my "line" - it's one thing to have a banner or donate button if folks WANT to contribute, but very instant ANY org starts spamming me with money-begs, they're gone from my list, you'd be amazed at just how much damage the NRA does to themselves that way, the constant stickin the hand out offends even the most fervent 2nd amendment folk to the point where they're in fact hated (and seen as collaborators, having done the same thing as the AARP and become a force that serves only themselves) cause when it comes to it, past a certain point of size and influence, these orgs always, ALWAYS come down to the *ENTIRE POINT* being getting the money out of you, and everything else secondary to that agenda, even their original purpose.

The EFF ain't there yet, but the ACLU certainly is.

So no, they can't have my pennies, few enough that I got, and for a fact it's WAY more cost effective on a personal level to kneecap and trip up the opposition at every turn and corner, cause often as not that's damn near free - especially when stupid political types open their mouth and hand you all the "ammo" you'll ever need!

Besides, paying someone else to do your dirty work is just repeating the cycle of foolishly trusting someone who tells you they have your own best interests in mind... if you just open your wallet....

Shit, I knew THAT was a lie when I was six and my asshole fathers church passed around the collection plate to build a bigger church, to get a bigger congregation, to get a bigger plate....

I saw THAT logic for what it was even as a kid!

-F

NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Monday, March 1, 2010 6:01 PM

BYTEMITE

I know, I had those same misgivings when I first started donating. My only excuse is I'm young and inexperienced. I'm a pretty quick learner, I only have to touch the hot stove once.

Them, and organizations like them, I'm never giving them my help and support again.

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Tuesday, March 2, 2010 8:15 AM

NIKI2

Gettin' old, but still a hippie at heart...

Well, the left-leaning MSNBC had a lot of talk about giving her a run for her money, but Halter ain't it. There I disagree with them strongly. She's a Blue Dog, which I resent, but realize she's to a certain point got to be, coming from Arkansas. A look at her voting record shows me she's pretty good, all around, despite her actions on health care.

I'd like to get rid of the Blue Dogs, since I blame them most of all for the obstructionism whe it comes to health care and more. But going further left is I think a mistake, and Halter an even bigger one.

I'm not a "member" of any organization that pushes me for contributions. I find out in the news and by checking on line who I might back, but whenever I go to something like that recent "virtual march", damned if they don't pop up for more money down the line. I immediately unsubscribe.

I'm sure I miss a lot of chances to help on this or that issue, but I don't accept unsolicited e-mails from hardly ANYONE, and don't need my e-mail cluttered up any further. I think you done good. But I wouldn't cut them all out because of one thing, or even several. I keep in mind that organizations like MoveOn are ideologs, so I won't agree with them a lot, but sometimes they do good stuff. We each have to choose our own path.

Supposedly they've raised far moe than anticipated for Halter since he entered this thing; I hope he doesn't defeat her, as I think that would give Arkansas to the Republicans.

The mentality of the Repubs, in demanding their people be ultra-right, has spread to the Dems, who seem to be starting to do the same. It's a shame; uncomfortable as it sometimes is, I believe in a "big tent". Hard-core ideologs are bad on either side.

"I'm just right. Kinda like the sun rising in the east and the world being round...its not a need its just the way it is." The Delusional "Hero", 3/1/10

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Tuesday, March 2, 2010 8:32 AM

BYTEMITE

Halter's not left. Pharmaceutical connections, remember? No politician in America is left-wing except maybe Dennis Kucinich. And, um, yeah, he crazy. You want a left extreme ideologue, there he is.

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Tuesday, March 2, 2010 8:41 AM

PIRATENEWS

John Lee, conspiracy therapist at Hollywood award-winner History Channel-mocked SNL-spoofed PirateNew.org wooHOO!!!!!!

Moveon has always been run as controlled opposition by Operatives for the New World Odor.

Your only choice to to find your own indy candidates from Libertarian and Constitutional Parties. Or run for office yourself.

NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Tuesday, March 2, 2010 8:55 AM

BYTEMITE

I dunno. I honestly think the Libertarians is where the Republicans funnel candidates that aren't acceptable in their mainstream party. And the constitution party, I mean, I really don't think the constitution is perfect, what with it being written by federalist (pro-corporate) entities.

None of the parties are any good. ._. It's this whole republic/representative system that's the issue. What our government should be is people on the local level working to solve their own problems. Electing people, even among people stating that they're opposed to this system, want to dismantle it, that just perpetuates the system. If they really felt that way, why are they running for office? Why seek power? And when you get power, how likely are you to give it back?

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Tuesday, March 2, 2010 9:01 AM

NIKI2

Gettin' old, but still a hippie at heart...

Byte, you have only to look at Lincoln's contributions and voting record to see she's in the pocket of Wall Street and big corporations...neither one is lilly white, as Frem said. Seems like no politician, however good their motives, lasts long in government before they become pawns for lobbyists. Campaign reform is what we REALLY need, to keep those (few?) who seek office from getting corrupted quickly.

"I'm just right. Kinda like the sun rising in the east and the world being round...its not a need its just the way it is." The Delusional "Hero", 3/1/10

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Tuesday, March 2, 2010 9:14 AM

BYTEMITE

Maybe. Or complete social revolution could do the same thing. Frankly, even considering all the guns and armies, one of those is looking a whole lot easier, less complicated, and if successful is probably more likely to have a better, more stable socio-economic outcome. Chances of success are maybe a few ten thousandsth of a point better than zero. Working through the quagmire, though, that seems like flat zero to me at this point.

In the current system, meaningful reform gets COMPROMISED to death. Oh! Election campaign reform! When the corporations have their say, they'd make it so politicians can't get ANY of their money from the little people... And then cut wages. >(

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Tuesday, March 2, 2010 10:44 AM

FREMDFIRMA

I actually like Kucinich, funny thing is, while I did bail the hell out of the city council at the first chance, I *did* do what they shoved me up there to do - I think you kind of *have* to be a bit mad to not be corrupted by it, but then that's it's own problem, innit ?

Funny thing, too, all them folk I set in place afterwords are facing a recall now, oh well.
(not sure if it's real or just a front for either of the factions I pissed off by cutting out of the loop though)

-F

NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Tuesday, March 2, 2010 11:26 AM

BYTEMITE

Dennis the person seems okay, I don't mind crazy. But in office, crazy tends to be something of a detriment. Even crazy awesome can cause problems.

It's a good point you bring up, a person giving up power and turning things over to uncorrupt people isn't unprecedented, but the first person has to not have WANTED it in the first place. That's the only problem. And I'm not convinced any candidate from any party really doesn't have their own interests at heart.

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Wednesday, March 3, 2010 8:51 AM

NIKI2

Gettin' old, but still a hippie at heart...

I like to believe there are those who go into politics with good intentions. Call me a cockeyed optimist. What I have trouble believing is that any of them manage to stick with their principles, faced with the daunting concept of re-election; then I think it goes from there.

As is evidenced currently, even those who MIGHT have good intentions have to either tow the line and keep their mouths shut, or get pushed out of the party--either party. There's a lot of good stuff in Lincoln's voting history, Blue Dog or not, it's healthy to have some in there who aren't idealogs or paid for...dream on, Leon.

And we certainly don't need more crazies; that's how you get a Bunnings or a Bachman...maybe a sanity test before someone can become a candidate? I know, dream on Leon...

"I'm just right. Kinda like the sun rising in the east and the world being round...its not a need its just the way it is." The Delusional "Hero", 3/1/10

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Wednesday, March 3, 2010 9:33 AM

BYTEMITE

Well, maybe an EQ test. A person with high EQ but who's fatbuck insane is useful for undermining the sheep and corrupt idiots with low EQ. No one ever takes them serious, but they're wise enough to do some damage.

It's the principle that the court jester operates on. We have far too many clowns, and not nearly enough jesters.

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Wednesday, March 3, 2010 10:23 AM

NIKI2

Gettin' old, but still a hippie at heart...

Hmmm, interesting theory. I LOVE "fatback insane", mind if I otion it?

I'm not sure that emotional quotient is at work here--would it be high EQ that that insights those wanting to corrupt those with low EQ? I'm not sure of that...I always thought of EQ as ability to empathize. But I guess it could also be interpreted as ability to read others, is that what you're saying? I.e., reading others in order to manipulate them into inciting emotions in those they preach to? Or am I out in left field?

I wouldn't encourage an IQ test, that's for sure...as they're biased. And having a p-doc decide if someone's viable as a candidate would be even worse...so I'm not sure how we would give a "sanity test". Conundrum, that...

"I'm just right. Kinda like the sun rising in the east and the world being round...its not a need its just the way it is." The Delusional "Hero", 3/1/10

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Wednesday, March 3, 2010 10:52 AM

BYTEMITE

Quote:
A deficiency in EI can mean a lack of success and the existence of emotional problems. Problems in coping with one’s environment are thought, by Bar-On, to be especially common among those individuals lacking in the subscales of reality testing, problem solving, stress tolerance, and impulse control.

Do politicians strike you has having a particularly high EQ?

Now, I'll grant you that aspects of high EQ are demonstrated in the abilities of politicans,

Quote:
1. Self-awareness — the ability to read one's emotions and recognize their impact while using gut feelings to guide decisions.
2. Self-management — involves controlling one's emotions and impulses and adapting to changing circumstances.
3. Social awareness — the ability to sense, understand, and react to others' emotions while comprehending social networks.
4. Relationship management — the ability to inspire, influence, and develop others while managing conflict.

But I'd argue that most of those abilities are second hand through whoever is managing the politician in question. Which tends to be a large group of people who COMBINED have a high EQ, but individually have low EQ and little to no empathy.

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Wednesday, March 3, 2010 5:22 PM

FREMDFIRMA

Heh, while Mikey is perhaps somewhat better at the Court Jester archtype than myself, I do on occasion play to the nastier side of it, saying the things no one else dares to without sugar coating it and dancing around the issue.

I *do* work the not-being-taken-seriously gig, but from another angle, playing hard to type (evil overlord) and in a melodramatic fashion to the point where folk mostly take it as either a bad-humor parody or bats in the belfry, which allows one to get close enough to (politically) slam a shank in their spine, grinning all the while cause I was from the start, quite deadly serious about it...

At which point they REALLY begin to think you're fucking insane.

Alas that with any given identity that'll only work a couple times, cause even the dumbest politico will catch wise after a while, but they have really short memories for the most part, and the best way to pull it off is to use THEM while they think they're using you - find some issue you want stonewalled or pushed through as much as they do (usually for different reasons) and then "help them out", grinning like a loon, but a damned effective one, and once the job is near done and they let their gaurd down...

Meh heh heh.

The real key to manipulating a politician is exploiting their extremely narrow focus, since THEY are only looking towards the next election cycle, and someone more goal-oriented can use this to plant the equivalent of a brick wall in their path by dropping the hammer on them during the victory celebration, leaving them in such a position where the only option that'll dig them out of the hole you just chucked em in, is climbing the rope YOU are holding out for them... grinning all the while.

-Frem
"Why is it that every time you smile, it reminds me that the baring of teeth is usually a sign of aggression ?"
-Justin.

NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

YOUR OPTIONS

SHARE THREAD

NEW POSTS TODAY

USER	POST DATE

USER

POST DATE