Grateful Dead

dead.net the official site

If John McCain wins the Republican nomination the Democrats have a problem. McCain crosses over and draws a lot of the Independent voters. The Obama and Clinton camps will not support the other. The other big issue I have with the Democrats is that they will not allow Michigan (my state) and Florida Delegates to be seated and counted--both states that Clinton won. So once again, the Democratic Party has lost all focus and until they get their collective heads out of their collective asses it will be a while before there is a Democrat seated in the Oval Office.

http://my.barackobama.com/page/group/DeadheadsForObama Here is word about the February 4 show at the Warfield. Tickets will become available today at 5 PM local time. For more information visit www.phillesh.net > > > >FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE: > > > >DEADHEADS FOR OBAMA AT THE WARFIELD JUST ANNOUNCED! > > > >DEADHEADS FOR OBAMA > >featuring > >BOB WEIR, MICKEY HART, PHIL LESH & FRIENDS > >The Warfield Theatre > >Monday, February 4, Doors 6:00 PM/ Show 7:30PM > >Tickets are $35.00 general admission (main floor) and > >$35.00 reserved seating (balcony) plus applicable service > >charges...all ages > >Two-ticket limit per person. > >Tickets will be available through Ticketmaster.com ONLY > >Will Call only event > > > >Deadheads for Obama > > > >Grateful Dead Members to Reunite for Barack Obama > > > >(San Francisco) Members of the Grateful Dead will host a get out the > >vote concert in support of Democratic Presidential candidate Barack > >Obama on Monday, February 4th at The Warfield Theatre in San > >Francisco. > > > >Mickey Hart, Phil Lesh, and Bob Weir, joined by Jackie Greene, John > >Molo, and Steve Molitz, will play a show together in support of > >Barack Obama. > > > >The video website Iclips will be producing a live simulcast streamed > >via the Internet on www.iclips.net at approximately 7:30pm PST. > > > >This will mark the first time that the members of the legendary band > >have performed together since 2004. They have agreed to reunite for > >this one-time-only event in order to lend support to Senator Obama > >leading into the crucial "Super- Tuesday" series of primaries held > >on Tuesday, February 5th. > > > >PLEASE NOTE: Tickets will be available through Ticketmaster.com > >ONLY. Tickets will NOT be available at the box offices, > >charge-by-phone or Ticketmaster outlets. Two-ticket limit per > >person. Tickets are non-transferable. No refunds or exchanges. A > >service charge is added to each ticket price. In the spirit of fair > >access to tickets for fans, this is a "WILL CALL ONLY" event. UPS > >and Ticketfast will not be available as delivery choices. You must > >bring your government issued photo ID and your credit card used to > >purchase the tickets to the box office window on the day of the show > >to retrieve these tickets. You and your guest must enter the venue > >directly upon picking up your order. **Will Call tickets are not > >transferable and must be picked up by card holder. Alternate names > >for will call are not allowed. No will call drop-offs permitted.** > >*** TICKETMASTER, AT ITS DISCRETION, WILL CANCEL ANY AND ALL ORDERS > >THAT EXCEED THE TICKET LIMIT WITHOUT NOTICE. THIS INCLUDES DUPLICATE > >ORDERS HAVING THE SAME NAME, BILLING ADDRESS OR CREDIT CARD. *** > >

well the one who names himself after Jerry Garcia got a pretty hard time when he first showed up on this site with his shameless campaigning....what do we think now eh?

To promote his agenda If the doors of perception were cleansed, everything would appear to man as it is, infinite. William Blake

I am thinking of registering as a user here under the name Obama!

http://my.barackobama.com/page/group/DeadheadsForObama I've been using jerry_garcia71 as my screen name on this site for 10 years. I have used it for everything requiring a screen name for so long that I'm afraid it's too late to change now! My email is jerry_garcia71@yahoo.com. Obama bought some dude out of using "Barack Obama" as a myspace name. Maybe cosmicbadger's gonna make some loot!

no all my money making scams go to shit..I leave that kind of stuff to the professionals...politicians!

I am prepared to forego my hostility and personally endorse your man in return for a ticket for the Warfield ;-)

Tuesday marks not just Mardi Gras, but a chance for Kansas Democrats to choose a candidate. I've never participated ina caucus before, so it should be interesting. With 2 to choose from, I'm leaning toward Barack mainly because of his fresh approach. Hilary certainly has connections, but she may repulse some folks to look at the other party candidate, likely John McCain. Wonder if Boone Pickens will slam his Vietnam credentials like he did to John Kerry 4 years ago...? Say Badger, this is a very large country with pockets of ultra-conservatives and rednecks scattered all over. When you were in N CA, was it the rice country north of Stockton/Sacramento? It does have a working class consisting mostly of Republican voters, much unlike the liberal/progressive elements found on the more populated coasts. Next time you're up there, stop in at Sierra Nevada Brewpub, in Chico!

as far as I remember the incident happened in some small place off the highway between Sacramento and Chico!!! Now that I am sure of a free ticket for the Obama benefit, I will extend my visit by a few days to revisit the area and check out the Sierra Nevada Brewpub! I hope your caucus lives up to expectations!

I hope they play "Playin' In The Band"... "All energy flows according to the whims of the Great Magnet. What a fool I was to defy him."

They take it on tour! Conversation is always more interesting than recitation, so speak your mind and not someone else's.

They come to the Gorge If the doors of perception were cleansed, everything would appear to man as it is, infinite. William Blake

...so vote for roundest candidate...Obama.

They take it on the road, not the obama thing , but the reuniting thing!!

they do too Steve-O

Nobody For President

you guys know what you're doing. OK, I'm in for Obama if he makes the ballot (God I hate politics!). I just can't vote another republican into the Tye Die house. Why do I feel defeated by this whole process? Will there ever be a time when we can feel like everything is going to be "alright"? "If the forms of this world die, which is more real, the me that dies or the me that's infinite? Can I trust my habitual mind, or do I need to learn to look beneath those things?"

Hey.. I created a Deadheads for Obama widget (sprout) using my new company's technology at http://sproutbuilder.com http://greenhouse.sproutbuilder.com/sprout/seed/FACwDX14AGFPBBwp You can also see updated versions at: http://sproutbuilder.com/deadheads Hope you all enjoy it and spread the word. peace, carnet

Obama has great pr, but I fear it is all an optical illusion.But before you hand him the keys to the store, try goggling Obama/Exelon. This guy is heavy in bed with nuclear, and that scares the shit out of me. And anyone else remember recent elections where you've been bombarded this heavily with how charismatic and charming the candidate is? Hell, they said Reagan was an orator. And Bush was the guy you wanted to have a beer with. I haven't seen much content from Obama, but I have seen a lot of spin, much of it painfully dishonest. I wish the band had stayed on the sidelines a little longer on this one.

I find this disturbing, and have not seen any response to it. THE AUDACITY OF TRUTH Caroline Glick Jerusalem Post, January 21, 2008 …Barack Obama has a good chance of securing his party's nomination for president and winning the general election…. Although the rumors that Obama—whose father and step-father were Muslims and who was educated in Muslim schools in Indonesia—is a Muslim are demonstrably false, his Christian affiliations are a cause for alarm in and of themselves. Obama belongs to the Trinity United Church of Christ in Chicago. Its minister and Obama's spiritual adviser is Rev. Jeremiah Wright Jr. In an investigative report on Obama published last week by the American Thinker Web site, Ed Lasky documented multiple examples of Wright's anti-Jewish and anti-white animus. Wright has called for divestment from Israel and refers to Israel as a "racist" state. Theologically, he believes that the true "Chosen People" are the blacks. Indeed, he is a black supremacist. He believes that black values are superior to middle class American values and that blacks should isolate themselves from the wider American society. Wright is a long-time friend of the virulently anti-Semitic head of the Nation of Islam—fellow Chicagoan Louis Farrakhan. The two traveled together to Libya some years ago to pay homage to Muammar Gaddafi. Last year Wright presented Farrakhan with a "Lifetime Achievement" award…. Obama's affiliation with Wright aligns with his choice of financial backers and foreign policy advisors. To varying degrees, all of them exhibit hostility towards Israel and support for appeasing jihadists. As Lasky notes, Obama has received generous support from billionaire George Soros. In recent years, Soros has devoted himself to replacing politicians who support fighting the forces of global terror and supporting Israel with politicians who support appeasing jihadists and dumping Israel. As a member of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, Obama opposed defining Iran's Revolutionary Guards as a terrorist group. He calls for the US to withdraw from Iraq - only to return if genocide is being carried out and then, only as part of an international force. He also supports opening negotiations with Iran even if the Iranians continue to enrich uranium. In forming these views, he is assisted by his foreign policy team which includes Zbigniew Brzezinski, Mark Brzezinski, Anthony Lake, Susan Rice and Robert Malley. All of these people are known either for their anti-Israel views or their pro-Arab views—or both. Malley, a Palestinian apologist invented and propagated the false claim that the 2000 Camp David summit between the Palestinian leader Yasser Arafat and then prime minister Ehud Barak failed because Israel wasn't serious about giving the Palestinians a state. This view is disputed by Barak and Clinton. For her part, as chief foreign policy advisor to Senator John Kerry during the 2004 presidential elections, Susan Rice reportedly convinced Kerry to announce that if elected he would appoint Jimmy Carter and James Baker to serve as his envoys for Middle East peace. Mark Brzezinski has openly called for unconditional negotiations with Iran. For more than 30 years, Zbigniew Brzezinski has distinguished himself as one of Israel's greatest foes in Washington. Unfortunately, in the anti-war frenzy now gripping much of the Democratic Party, one could say that there is nothing notable about the fact that Obama has hired anti-Israel foreign policy advisors, attends an anti-Israel church, and receives financial backing from anti-Israel billionaires. But even in this atmosphere Obama stands out—for not only does he theoretically support appeasement, he is actively advancing the interests of Islamists seeking to take control over a state allied with the US. [In] Kenya…elections pitted incumbent President Mwai Kibaki against Raila Odinga who leads the Orange Democratic Movement. While the polls showed the public favoring Odinga, Kibaki was declared the winner. Odinga rejected the results and his supporters have gone on rampages throughout the country that have killed some 700 people so far…. Kibaki is close ally of the US in the war against Islamic terror. In stark contrast, Odinga is an ally of Islamic extremists. On August 29 Odinga wrote a letter to Kenya's pro-jihadist National Muslim Leaders Forum. There he pledged that if elected he would establish Sharia courts throughout the country; enact Islamic dress codes for women; ban alcohol and pork; indoctrinate schoolchildren in the tenets of Islam; ban Christian missionary activities, and dismiss the police commissioner, "Who has allowed himself to be used by heathens and Zionists." Although Odinga is an Anglican, he referred to Islam as the "one true religion" and scorned Christians as "worshipers of the cross." Obama strongly supports Odinga who claims to be his cousin. As Daniel Johnson reported recently in the New York Sun, during his 2006 visit to Kenya, Obama was so outspoken in his support for Odinga that the Kenyan government complained to the State Department that Obama was interfering with the internal politics of the country. …. It can only be hoped that in the coming weeks and months ahead of the presidential election, the political center of American politics will reassert itself and that the final race will be between leaders who abjure bigotry and understand that foreign policy is neither about minding your business nor being polite. It is about opposing enemies, supporting allies and knowing the difference between them.

I support Obama as any good Head with their eyes open can see Obama isa great man! All the negativity is amazing! If you are a SEER as are Bob, Phil snd Mickey we ALL saw the X factor in Obama- you can HEAR Truth in his voice just as you COULD HEAR IT in the DEAD. I was ASTOUNDED TO FIND MY BROTHERS all agreed enough to reunite- SOMETHING is Happening here and all the pro Israel pro war posters have lost touch. Feel the FORCE- OBAMA has it! WE ALL INDEPENDENTLY CAME TO THE SAME CONCLUSION! ASTOUNDING! LIKE- HEY THIS GUY IS DIFFERENT! Great work boys......and play like its your last GIG always! Black Peter is upon us all...... AUM Peachy!!! GO OBAMA! "if the Thunder don't get ya then the lightning will!"- The Wheel "Gonna find out something only dead men know" - Silvio Class of Red Rocks '79... Life without the Dead is not life...and so we carry on...

that nasty Mr Obama, consorting with foreigners, getting dressed up foreigner outfits, knowing people who have radical views, taking an interest in different perspectives as to how things are and might be, not buying into the orthodoxy of the paranoid 'us (=US) and them' world view. Hell pretty soon we are going to hear that he was once mean to a puppy and went to a Dixie Chicks show.

Does he have the ability to lead this country out of it's current mess? Or will he behave like most Democrats and be afraid to govern? All his talk about change will go out the window when he fails in universal health care, aiding Kosovo, tuirniong the econonmy around. Remember, this country will expect quick results and when the country does not get the results can he handle the pressure?

I'm ready to see some real unity in this country and to get back to a place where people around the world take us seriously again. The problem I see with all of these candidates is that non of them seem to have a strong stance on foreign relations.

I like Obama for his support of small buisness, but Id be cool with having just about anyone besides Bush in office. Nader would be cool too. yay cool moose party.

I wouldn't purport to speak for Mr. Obama, but I would like to make a response to the thrust of Ms. Glick's piece. Given the target audience and venue of publication of her article, I can well understand her preoccupation with the import to Israel of the US Presidential election. While US foreign policy is certainly a relevant and germane issue, it is NOT the most ordinate one. The election of a US President is about what's best for the US, not what's best for Israel. Further, US policy towards the Arab and Muslim worlds hasn't exactly been a shining beacon of success and infusing some fresh perspectives there might produce a more constructive future for all, including Israel. As far as a President's ability to "lead" our economy, I think it's important to remember how the basic structure works. All money (i.e. spending) bills originate in the House of Representatives, and must pass muster in the Senate before being forwarded to the Executive branch for final authorization and implementation. The Executive branch has no power to introduce any spending plans of it's own. It is more than welcome, and usually does draft suggestions of what spending they would like to make, but it is the Legislature that actually creates the acts and laws that cause all government spending to occur. That's why I chuckle every time I read some rose colored glass filtered story about the economic prosperity of the Clinton administration. As though Mr. Clinton had anything to do with it. Does everyone remember who was running the Legislature in the 90's? Nevertheless, it is the common misconception that the President deserves the credit - or blame - for the relative success of what is basically a free market economy. In addition to electing a new President this November, every single seat in the House is also on the ballot, along with one third of the seats in the Senate. Just something to keep in mind. Conversation is always more interesting than recitation, so speak your mind and not someone else's.

I am not really interested in politics and don't think this site should be a forum for political conversation. But that is niether her or there. I view John McCain as the best of the options likely to be on the ticket for President. I am interested in increased levels of defense spending, lower taxes for both corporations and individuals, smaller government, and the privatization of social security (which will likely never happen). Nonetheless, my vote really means nothing in liberal New York, where I just get my vote on the record and is not enough to put a Republican candidate over the top. Mr. Pid, you are correct when you say that the President gets too much credit and too much blame regarding the strength and weakness in the economy. Actually, the Federal Reserve probably plays a greater role in the health of the economy than the President does. This is something that is lost on most people. Just my quick 2 cent political rant.

I dug everything you just posted, couldn't said it better myself. + a very interesting picture ( in both sense of the word)

I'M PARALYZED FROM MY NECK DOWN BUT MY BRAIN WORKS FINE I WILL VOTE 4 MCCAIN CLINTON DID NOTHING 4 ME SO ONLY SMART CHOICE

Mr. PId, The importance of the article authored by Ms. Glick, revolves around the question of racism. You dismiss the article for the reasons you mention below, but entirely miss the question of character it calls to question. I suggest you re-read Ms. Glicks article as if it was written by an American author. Perhaps that will help you understand the important points it is raising. -EW "Mr Pid wrote: While US foreign policy is certainly a relevant and germane issue, it is NOT the most ordinate one. The election of a US President is about what's best for the US, not what's best for Israel."

EW, I do understand and appreciate your concerns. Thank you for having the decency to air them for the enlightenment of all. I, too, was very concerned by the obvious racism exhibited in Ms. Glick's article but chose not to make an issue out of it. But since you brought it up, I would like to offer this personal observation: Those who paint with a broad brush would be best served to mind the spatter. Casting individuals as being "anti-Israel" or "pro-Arab" or holding that they are "appeasing jihadists and dumping Israel" merely because they are prepared to engage in dialogue and diplomacy in hope of negotiating peaceful resolutions to disputes tells us more about the author than it does about the subject of her work. Please don't misunderstand my perspective here. I am not "anti-Israel." But I'm not anti-Palestine either. I believe that Israel could greatly enhance it's security by doing everything in it's power to assist in helping the Palestinians create a robust, economically viable and sustainable State. People with full bellies and fat wallets don't strap bombs to themselves. My father has been a life long conservative. Many years ago when he was living in New York City, he was actively involved in something truly unusual, the successful campaign and election of a Republican congressman from a Manhattan district. He has since moved to California, and in the recent primary, for the first time in his life cast a vote for a Democrat running for any office. It wasn't for Mrs. Clinton. As near as I can tell, the success of Mr. Obama's campaign so for defies traditional demographic boundaries. I think that is a reflection of a significant weight of the American electorate that chooses to move beyond seeing demographically defined attributes such as race, gender, religious affiliation or sexual orientation as valid political issues. Perhaps I'm overly optimistic, but I would like to believe that we are finally approaching a society where the character of any individual is defined and assessed solely by the actions of that individual, and that people will be seen for who they are, rather than what they are. As far as getting an official response from the Obama campaign to appear on this venue, I would love to believe that the political mainstream was prepared to take this community seriously enough to do so. One can only hope. Conversation is always more interesting than recitation, so speak your mind and not someone else's.

Nice post Mr. Pid. Thank you. I respect your views, and even agree with many of them, which is why I support Mr. Obama. The article raises some alarming concerns for me personally. I understand if you do not share the same feelings, or have reconciled them. I have not. I do not expect Mr. Obama to visit the grateful dead fourm and reply, although that sure would impress me if he did =) Some days ago, I went to the official Obama web site, and submitted the article, voiced my concerns and hope Mr. Obama would reply in some official capacity directly to the article. I have no idea if he will respond, at least at this point, since he is attempting to obtain the nomination from his party. Once the actual campaign for President begins, hopefully articles like this will come more to the surface by the press, and an official response may come. I believe, and hope, his reply to such an article would make me feel better enough to move on, and remove this question mark for me. Until then, it will remain just that, a question mark I would prefer an official response from Mr. Obama on. Many here have likely not seen this article, which is the only reason I posted it. If like you, others here have reconciled the issues it presents, I respect that, but I hope we can agree the fact I need more of a direct response from Mr. Obama does not make me stubborn, or narrow minded. The article makes me very uncomfortable, and I would prefer to hear a direct reply to it from the man we may elect as President of the United States. Peace -EW

To me, there is no choice. One party is about war, and their candidate proudly says we "could be in Iraq for 100 years".... this is with YOUR MONEY AND MINE. We MUST stop this horrible carnage. Vote peace, vote Obama!

I'm with you Daisy.

I agree with the above. But the deeper issue is our dependence on oil and ethanol is not the answer. And the deeper issue than even this is our perceived need for automobiles. (yes, I too am part of this) We drove around the country touring and contributing to what? The dark side? Kind of mind boggling. The yin and the yang of the road. If the doors of perception were cleansed, everything would appear to man as it is, infinite. William Blake

what if... the 2-party system was soon-to-be the downfall of this country? http://www.strike-the-root.com/vote.html =================== moc.swencigolyzzuf.www ===================

McCain promises to be a continuation of the Bush years, which by almost any measure have been a disaster. I really expected more from him but I know better than to put much faith in politicians. Of the three I'll take Obama.

my husband's all for Obama, change, get a fresh start out of the washington bogged down with lobbyists,etc... but to be in a position to gain the nomination in the first place, you're already part of the 'old boy's network'. Hillary has connections, not experience. if she had experience it meant that she was privy to decision-making she wasn't allowed to be privy of. so Obama has a good enough record, keeps harping on the war vote, a vote like many that he refused to give a vote on, has dirty Chicago politics behind him- and all that against a war hero who is a hawk that wants to continue a non-sensical war because 'we' will show the world as leaders how it's done. I live in a very densely democratic area, eastern pennsylvania- and it'll give Obama the vote most likely, but the center of the state is rural, we call it Pennsyl-tucky, sometimes pennsyl-bama- and I have a feeling that like a lot of places everywhere, NRA card-carrying militia members and most southern men aren't giving Obama a vote. As much as many don't want more Clintonism, or a woman in the white House, they'd sooner vote for McCain to cancel out Obama. The vote swing this time is the young vote. I lost my first vote of Carter VS Reagan, but this time we need the USA to be concerned with world issues that don't revolve around where we get our oil. If McCain wins- then education is kaput! No child left behind isn't a possibility and is an utter travesty and affront to public education. $$$$ spent on waste- we will have no Social security at all, cost of living will push anyone out of the middle class, and the minority achievement and employment gaps will increase even more. Unemployment will be more epidemic than now, which is at an all time high.. I am scared because if I had to bet who will win, I think deep down that most Americans are going to go with McCain- I'll still go Democratic, but I think the young have to rock the vote and go to the polls in numbers! Now I have to decide if Hillary's politics are any better or worse than Obama's- so far tObama just appears to be more civil. get all your friends out to vote! get anyone you know registered republican to get it changed so they can vote in their state's primary... and then vote! We are our own worst enemies- remember, Bush got RE elected, people didn't get enough the first time going! Ami

Yeah, I missed the Dead "re-union", being in Idaho. Location notwithstanding, some bloggers missed it too, (the point, that is...). It's all about change."The sun will shine in my back door someday". Maybe that day has come. Barack Obama is a decent man. Hillary & McCain; more of the same. Everyone, please,open your eyes... They are part of the political machinery that has been steamrolling over Americans, bargaining with lobbyists, and selling out to the "pro-life-war-mongering", constitution stomping, big brother, elitist right! Educate yourselves and do some research to find out the depth and breadth of lies that spew forth from Hillary's pie-hole. We don't need another liar in the house; male OR female. She has lied about her experience. She never had security clearance and sleeping with slick Willy doesn't count...Talk to Northern Ireland. She brought peace to them don't you know? All of Ireland is laughing about that...Macedonia? She claims to have opened their borders... funny, they were open before she even arrived and Bosnia...well you know how she ran from the plane under sniper fire...liar, liar, liar. The list is long...She didn't even pay the health care premiums for her OWN STAFF!!! Liar, liar, liar!!!! S-Chip for childrens' medical care? Check out her claims on that issue...Don't be fooled by the wolf in womens' clothing. Ship of fools...sail away from me...

If I vote for someone and they later do something really fucked up, as they always do, then does that mean I am partly responsible? And if I don't vote to keep out the most evil one, what then? Obama seems like a nice guy. Talks the talk, but can he walk the walk? We have no real way to know. He kinda back stabbed his minister but had little choice as to not do so would have been suicide, perhaps. I would tend to favor him although I'm sure he has a snowballs chance in hell of beating McCain. Hilary, where to start... I find her to be completely false and untrustworthy. Having said that, her and Bill back in the White House would basically be a rerun of Bills term without the Monica thing. That wouldn't be so bad. But she has no chance of beating McCain. McCain, since Bush cheated him last time around he seems to have been playing the game of play submissive to the big dog until in a position to take over with the big dogs help. Has this changed him, or is he still the same maverick under the hood? He's actually the most liberal Republican of this era. He's a true war hero in an age where the term is loosely thrown around, and has the most experience. I think he's a man of conviction even if I don't agree with all of his positions. I think he will bring the troops home in the right way if given the chance. I don't think he really wants the war to go on any longer than necessary but u never tell the enemy your plans so it's intelligent to demoralize the enemy by saying you'll stay 100 years if necessary. I think when all the hoo-haa dies down Americans will take him as the most steady, stable choice. Are you kind?

I was not sure who I would vote for this time around but then I read “audacity of Hope" and I made up my mind. Barack Obama is what I think of when I read parts of the constitution. He is the memory I have of reciting the pledge of allegiance back when I was in 1st grade. Really, he is a reminder of what I was always taught and believed. I also feel his foregin policy will be more intuned with reality as he as actually lived outside the US. Lets see what happens but Barack Obama is change.

Sorry to burst everybodys bubble. The difffernce between OBama and McCain is about 15%,Dems and Repubs are two gangs that are constantly fighting over the turf called USA. I suggest you learn about the Libertarian party ot the libertarian philosophy. Ron Paul is a libertarian running as a republican in the primarys. I like Obamas attitude however his policies will not get through Congress. Clinton has the smarts to be president but is so politically slimey she inspires no one. McCain well it won't be Bush 3 however he will be tied to an old corrupt party. Look behind each parties stance: Dems will talk about education however what they mean is "as long as the NEA controls it." Repubs say school choice but what they really want is tax dollars going to religous schools. The same for defense, farm policy, Social Security etc. They use their power to reward their friends and punish their enemies until they cough up protection money. Both parties will do anything to stay in power. They start wars, find enemies everywhere and think nothing of stealing our rights to make sure they keep their system going. Our gov't owes between 10-15 trillion dollars in unfunded gov't pensions, subsidies, Social Security. Medicare. See the Fed lowering interest rates? (not for us) After the election they will rise sharply. Why? because our dollar is becoming weaker and weaker. It will not attract the people who buy our debt the people who own the debt will demand higher interest rates. Why do we still have troops in Europe and Japan? Why do we insist on surrounding Russia with NATO countries. Why? because our industrial military/welfare complex needs to have a large military to keep the economy humming. Dems will scream bloody murder when somebody wants to cut out the military base in their district. Repubs claim they want a smaller govt but have done nothing to shrink gov'r unless its to let corporations off the hook when they make a bad business deal. Both .parties use the fear of other peoples and countries to keep the military industrial complex going go into the ghetto every politican is running a welfare office-I used to insure an AIDS clinic in Miami-they never seemed to have the money to staff the clinic with doctors and medicine. But every board member got their $60,000 salary. and they were all connected pols. when my wife was a Masters degree candidate the welfare agency she worked at made up dozens of fake clients to get more grant money-she refused to sign off on it and was terminated. The owner was an elected official who plays the race card every election. Want to change the system? Read books by Ayn Rand, Milton Friedman and stop looking the other way. Free your self and your mind first. Oh and listen to the Good Ol Grateful Dead. And the road goes on forever.... BobbaLee

Bobbalee, I am actually a registered Libertarian and I registered for the party when I was in High school and always liked the idea that "nobody should tell me what to do while I am in my own home." But as I have many agreements with the Libertarian party I also have many disagreements such as no gun laws, no environmental laws, no social programs, little to no government. Maybe I am a bit out dated on these policies but this was the Libertarian point of view when I was following it closer. If I am wrong please correct me. I have been a fan of Milton Friedman (economics geek here) but I always had many questions about minimizing the role of government in a free market. This is sort of Bush’s policy on global warming. Let the market figure it out as it knows more that the government when it comes to such issues. I studied Friedman’s quantity theory of money and we can even say that Friedman is responsible for the connection between inflation and money supply and hence our current interest rate system that the Fed uses today. Federal Funds Rate etc. But I think you disagree with this right? Please tell me more about the Libertarian party as I have been out of touch with them for some time.

federal reserve,banks, inflation..i know a very interesting documentary called "Zeitgeist",theres a lot of information about all this stuff:-)(-:

McCain is the only logical choice. as a registered independent i resent the fact that i feel the need to vote republican if only to vote against two not even remotely qualified people, either way the "party" decides. its scary to me that either are even up for nomination. Keep on rockin in the free world

Who to vote for? I enjoyed the wealth of the Clinton years, could this be a repeat? I know absolutely nothing about Obama, except that he is younger. That could be a good thing. I know all about Bob, Phil, and Mickey's veiws, but do I want to support the California dream? I am really iffy on this issue. My primary is coming fast and I really need to make a decision, we shall see.