Hacker News new | comments | ask | show | jobs | submit login

"During the Bush administration, people were kidnapped all over the world and dumped in secret prisons, where they were tortured. During the Obama administration, the kidnappings, the secret prisons and the torture, have been replaced by death lists and extrajudicial executions of people, carried out by pilotless aircrafts, known as drones." I spent hours and hours in 2007/08 watching Obama with the hope that change is real this time. And now, it's painful just to hear his name. With the current candidates on either side, just bracing for worse.



> I spent hours and hours in 2007/08 watching Obama with the hope that change is real this time

If most people just watch, even the best efforts towards change are going to be subverted.

> With the current candidates on either side, just bracing for worse.

There's always Bernie, but it means putting some effort into the political process yourself. :)

> What I understand is that the power of corporate America, Wall Street, the corporate, the media is so great that real change to transform our country does not take place unless MILLIONS OF PEOPLE BEGIN TO STAND UP and say very loudly and clearly that the United States government has got to represent all of us, and not just the top 1 percent," he said.


What makes you think that Bernie Sanders is any different on this issue than anyone else?

Sure, he says nice things about stopping the programs. But he's clear that Snowden should go through the legal process and receive punishment. In particular he does NOT say that he would give Snowden clemency. Which makes his position indistinguishable in practice from Hillary's.


> Which makes his position indistinguishable in practice from Hillary's.

Love him or hate him, we all owe Snowden our thanks for forcing upon the nation an important debate. But the debate shouldn't be about him. It should be about the gnawing questions his actions raised from the shadows.[1]

Not sure "indistinguishable" is the most accurate word. Seems her stance is much less forgiving/lenient and focuses more on the act of breaking the law and that he should be punished for that.[2]

[1] http://www.sanders.senate.gov/newsroom/must-read/why-i-dont-...

[2] http://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2015/oct/13/clinton-sande...


There are two positions, 1) punish Edward for revealing what our servants do in our name or 2) do not.

Everyone is camp #1 is indistinguishable from the people who abuse our trust themseves. Criminal.


He may be in perfect agreement with Snowden himself. I believe Snowden would be happy to serve a reasonable prison sentence after a fair trial.


It appears you're conflating a stand on a particular issue with the others your parent poster brought up. A cursory look at the two candidates' platforms shows their positions to be widely divergent, especially when it comes to foreign policy and defense.


I think it's a mistake to think that people disagree on the general direction, other than jobs (income). If anything, the 1%ers tend to be more concerned with esoterics of law, war, etc, than the rah rah working class.


> There's always Bernie

If you think Bernie is going to actually do anything different if he makes it to the White House, well you are living in a dream world then.


Obama was promising to launch cruise missiles and drone strikes into Pakistan during the campaign; why did you think he was going to be less violent and more restrained than Bush?

It seems that many Obama supporters whipped themselves into such a hatred of Bush that they never really considered who they were really supporting (, though I do not presume to accuse you of that).


But the alternative was McCain, who accused Obama of being weak on war matters. So if you wanted to favor a candidate that seemed like 'less war', you would've still selected Obama.


"the" alternative... that's one of the biggest issues with the system (locked into two parties).


Obama turned 180˚ on whistleblowers and he promised "Change". We didn't thought that he will abandon Habeas Corpus at all and turn local conflicts into a undeclared global war on everybody. This was not expected.


> I spent hours and hours in 2007/08 watching Obama with the hope that change is real this time. And now, it's painful just to hear his name. With the current candidates on either side, just bracing for worse.

# Don't tell me that some power can corrupt a person; You haven't had enough to know what it's like!


Back in 2008 some friends invited me to celebrate Obama party. I was only one who told them then he is a damn liar, a good one, but a liar. Was a good party anyway.

And Im telling you know, a candidate will come a few months from now which will again win your hearts and minds and promise what you want, and you'll again fall for it.

Youre american presidential election is an strong illusion of partifipating in governmental decisions. Thats all it is, you dont have anyone reasonable to vote for.


My favorite part about American politics is that apparently a candidate is declared the "winner" a year and half before the actual election.


My favourite part of the US elections is the false premise of voting for either a bullet in the left side of your brain, or as a pleasant alternative, the right hand side.


Don't blame me, I voted for Kodos.


I seriously believe there should be a bottom line vote for "None of the above, choose new candidates"

This and abolish the party system, let each individual stand on their own merit.


The idea that you have no say, except once every few years, to pick one of the per-chosen to "respresent" you, isn't actually at-all democratic. It's more like monarchy-light.


Having more than two parties also helps a lot, btw.

By which I mean, at least five, with realistic odds.

The chance of that happening is only slightly more likely than hoping for a perfect enlightened despot unicorn to step up.




Guidelines | FAQ | Support | API | Security | Lists | Bookmarklet | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: