Alan Grayson

[L0oniX]

"You did this. Your calls and e-mails. Your pressure. The military industrial complex, the neoconservatives like Dick Cheney, the foreign policy corporate-funded think tanks in D.C., the warmongers at the State Department - they wanted war, but you wouldn’t let them. We stood up for peace."

http://alangraysonemails.tumblr.com/post/60936381207/how-we-stopped-a-war-for-now

After three frenetic weeks, during which time Team Grayson was burning the midnight oil every night, it’s time to take stock of what we’ve accomplished.

Here were the headlines in late August, just before we started our campaign against U.S. military intervention in Syria.

"Syria crisis: UK and US finalise plans for military strikes" - The Guardian, August 27.
"Syria strike due in days, West tells opposition - sources" - Reuters, August 27.
"Strike Against Syria is Imminent" - Reuters, August 27.
"Obama Will Bomb Syria" - Politico, August 26.
"U.S. military ‘ready’ to attack Syria, Hagel says" - CBS News, August 27.

And here are the headlines, now:

"Obama to explore diplomatic route on Syria," - Reuters, September 10. "Obama to explore diplomatic route on Syria," - Reuters, September 10.
"U.S. to Work Through U.N. on Syria Arms Proposal" – The New York Times, September 10.
"Obama Agrees To U.N. Discussion Of Putting Syria Chemical Weapons Under International Control" - Associated Press, September 10.
"Syria Will Sign Chemical Weapons Convention, Declare Arsenal, Foreign Ministry Says" - Reuters, September 10.

[Lasher]

1. I contacted both my Senators and my House Rep.

I asked them to oppose any and every measure that would authorize or condone military action against Syria. I am but one of many.

[leftstreet]

2. DURec

What a stark difference in those headlines

[L0oniX]

5. I tend to think we really did make a difference this time.

[Cryptoad]

19. Do you know what Shinola looks like?????? nt

[L0oniX]

23. I'll bet that you can see it when you look in a mirror. n/t

[HangOnKids]

34. That is Taking the Shinola to a new level

Well done!

[daleanime]

30. If I say "no"......

will you write an essay on the way it looks, smells, and taste?



I like to defer to experts when ever possible.

[rhett o rick]

75. I cant believe how childish you and your "Group" are. nm

[Cryptoad]

97. do tell

who is "my group"

[JackRiddler]

141. The ones who can't tell shit from shinola...

as long as a "D" administration is serving up the substance in question.

[Cryptoad]

144. That is a lost "Group" ,,,,,,,

[Brewinblue]

73. Kinda scary,

huh?

I mean, we, us, with some power.

I so love Congressman Grayson.

Now lets go kick some GOP ass!!!!

[idwiyo]

3. K&R

[Nye Bevan]

4. I can't help wondering whether we would be in the position we are now,

if Alan Grayson instead of President Obama had been running things from the start.

Would Syria really have made the concessions that it has agreed to if it had been clear that there would be no US military action under any circumstances?

[L0oniX]

6. I can't help wondering who made us the world police ...when we need so much help here at home.

[Nye Bevan]

11. Yeah, America First. Who cares about those damned furriners (nt)

[L0oniX]

12. Only a fool would rescue his neighbor when his own family is in danger. n/t

[Nye Bevan]

13. Or give anything to a homeless person unless they were rich (nt)

[L0oniX]

17. Well I am not rich @ 15k a year and I've helped out at a homeless food line and raise...

money for Meals of Wheels. So ...no you don't have to be rich to help out.

[deurbano]

15. I reject "America First." My choice is people of the "World (including the U.S. & Syria) First."

I thought the proposed strikes would have a negative (potentially, profoundly negative) impact on the the people of Syria, the US... and the world.

[azurnoir]

28. you mean like we 'helped' Iraq?

'cause that was the kind of help we were offering Syria

[deurbano]

37. I OPPOSE the proposed US strikes on Syria. (But not because I believe in "America 1st.")

[pampango]

58. Well said, deurbano. n/t

[daleanime]

31. If bombs are your idea of help...

I don't want your help.

[raindaddy]

14. If Alan Grayson had been running things from the start...

Syria would've been put in perspective and the middle-class and poor in THIS country would be his major focus instead of the war profiteers, global corporations and banks.

Instead of using the office of the presidency to sell another war in the Middle East he'd be waging war against the Republicans in the name of jobs, health care, protecting Social Security and our civil liberties.

[Whisp]

50. so you think Congress would get along fine with Alan?

Yeh, let Alan Sort Them Out...

lolz. the fantasies here are awesome.

[raindaddy]

53. Waging war

Since when does "waging war" translate into getting along?
Instead of secret trade deals designed to hand over even more power to global corporations we would be fighting what was once called the good fight.

[Whisp]

114. dream along.

yeh sure, Grayson would solve it all, Obama is just being a lazy, clueless and stupid man.

have a nice visit here!

[Cryptoad]

21. I can't help wondering whether we would be in the position we are now,

If Romney had won?

[RetroLounge]

82. You can't help thinking about Romney?

big surprise

RL

[Cryptoad]

95. Thats right

if he had been elected ,,, Him and Congress would have boots on Ground in Syria and plenty of wide spread bombing of dogs , women and children. Thank God for President Obama!

[RetroLounge]

99. wide spread bombing of dogs?

unhinged.

RL

[nikto]

148. Cats, too, champ!

But perhaps collateral damage beats mass-spaying and neutering, eh?


God, you are brilliant.

[JI7]

43. Grayson thought "Allah" should deal with it , it wasn't our problem

[karynnj]

159. True - following Grayson's advice,

The US would have said "not our problem" - Russia would have continued saying "there is no problem" - and there is a real possibility Assad would use chemical weapons again.

Right after Aug 21, one of the NPR shows had an expert on, who explained why he thought Assad did what he did -- it was essentially to tell any community that this would be their fate if a significant number of the rebels were in their community - even without their support.

With no world response, this likely would not have been a one time occurrence - if that were the goal.

I seriously doubt that Kerry or Obama were influenced by Grayson.

[harun]

107. Syria hasn't done shit yet.

[Whisp]

7. yep: We Let Alan Sort it Out.

[L0oniX]

9. Maybe you did. Others were happy to have Alan join in with the crowd. n/t

[Uncle Joe]

8. Don't relax, it's not over yet, but kicking and recommending anyway.

Thanks for the thread, L0oniX.

[zeemike]

16. A good reminder thanks.

And thanks L0oniX.for this thread.

[Catherina]

40. +1 on both counts n/t

[The Link]

10. Rec.

[Cryptoad]

18. Grayson..... another Congressional Wonder that....

checks the wind direction every morning before getting out of bed!

[beerandjesus]

32. I was wondering how long it would take for the Grayson hate to start.

Incredible how some on the left are so used to being treated with contempt by the Democratic Party, that they become suspicious of any Democrat who expresses a genuinely leftist opinion. It's like Stockholm Syndrome or something.

[HangOnKids]

35. Gee you are in bed with Grayson?

Good to know!

[Cryptoad]

52. Do you really think some kinda homophobic rub reference by you is an insult to me...

Sorry I don't insult that easily !

[Doctor_J]

54. Really? Which way was the wind blowing a month ago?

derp...obamaisgod...derp

[Cryptoad]

55. Blowing toward the Derps,,,,,? nt

[rhett o rick]

77. Grayson is a Democrat. Are you hating Democrats now? Maybe your love has swung to Gen Clapper. nm

[Cryptoad]

96. No he is not a Democrat

He is anything you want him to be!

[b.durruti]

154. I didn't think such naked reich-wing sentiments were allowed here. ~nt~

[L0oniX]

103. At this point I am smelling troll on this one. n/t

[Hell Hath No Fury]

106. This one has been stinking up the place -

since the get-go.

So incredibly obvious that I am surprised It has lasted this long.

[Starry Messenger]

20. k&r

[iamthebandfanman]

22. another dillusional 'hero'

trying to take credit for something that had nothing to do with any of those changed headlines.


im sorry but, some people only respond to the threat of violence.

this notion that you can talk peace to a genocidal homicidal manic is laughable.

yes, im sure if we had all just joined hands and said to adolf hitler 'please sir, wont you stop' he would have quickly abandoned his dreams of world domination and stopped his genocide of a whole ethnic group.

no one should be 'pro-violence', but sometimes people (because they are flawed humans with lust , greed, and a want for control in their hearts) can not be reasoned with.

[AgingAmerican]

24. You apply a Hitler analogy to Obama?

You really want to do that?

[L0oniX]

26. Mafia tactics ....that's what these war pigs are all about.

[jmowreader]

84. I think he was applying it to Assad

[nikto]

150. I had some truly awful pizza the other night...

It was worse than Hitler.








I hated the movie, "World War Z".
It was worse than Hitler.




What a useful phrase!

[L0oniX]

25. Delusional? Irony! "You did this" Put down the crack pipe.

[sibelian]

44. "im sorry but, some people only respond to the threat of violence."

How is the privileged access you enjoy to the cognition of these individuals acheived?

[grahamhgreen]

69. Don't be so hard on yourself, LOL

[L0oniX]

104. +1

[KittyWampus]

27. What you didn't do- contribute to getting Syria to admit it had chemical weapons or agree to

a diplomatic solution.

[iandhr]

29. To call Kerry of the President warmongers are just wrong

For two years the President has held off involvement.


If saw him last night you would see how much grayer he is. You can see how heavily it weighs on him.

[L0oniX]

33. Syria is one of 5 targets from back when that Rumseld and Wolfy boy set back when...

and is still a target ...Kerry or no Kerry. There is an agenda ...and mafia tactics to go along with that.

[Summer Hathaway]

39. So Syria was one of five targets

of the PNACers.

Does that mean that Syria, regardless of any actions it may take now or in future, is forever "off the table", because to deal with them in any way is to be automatically construed as following the PNAC plan?

[L0oniX]

46. Twisting and framing are always your options.

[Summer Hathaway]

48. I think it a perfectly reasonable query.

Is Syria forever untouchable because it was a PNAC target, and therefore engaging it in any way means one is automatically following the PNAC agenda?

I don't see what I've 'twisted' here. It is people like you are insistent that Obama's involvement in the Syria issue is proof that he is furthering the goals of PNAC.

Thanks for the tinfoil hat - but I'm not the one who needs it. I'm not the one advancing CTs; you are.

[truedelphi]

62. I'm sure the PNAC crowd will be able to figure out a way

To implicate Syria in such a way that the US military is forced to go all out against them. Unless of course, there is some way to get us directly into the Big One against ran. (Which is the goal all along.)

They have the money; the conventional media; and lots of abilities that we can only guess at.

[Summer Hathaway]

68. A total non-answer to my question.

Is Syria, regardless of any actions it may take now or in future, forever "off the table", because to deal with them in any way is to be automatically construed as following the PNAC plan?

There have been many posts here asserting that by engaging in Syria, Obama IS following the PNAC agenda, and furthering its goals.

Does this mean that any president - Obama, as well as his successors - are permanently precluded from ever engaging Syria, because to do so automatically means they are pursuing PNAC's agenda?

It's a rather simple question.

[truedelphi]

80. Whatever.

There are numerous occasions when the USA has used illegal weapons. Those weapons include Agent Orange, white phosphorous, napalm, land mines, cluster bombs, and depleted uranium. In the case of land mines and depleted uranium, the hazards of those illegal weapons do not dissipate inside the region where they were deployed for decades after the fighting has ended.

Maybe we should bomb ourselves?

We also have a "good friend and ally" in the Middle East that was confirmed to have used white phosphorous inside a 575 page report by the UN. That report was completed in 2009, regrding the actions that nation took in Dec 2008 and Jan 2009. I don't remember us needing to bomb that nation, or threaten that nation, or whatever.

So I don't see your question as being simple. I think your question and that whole line of questioning is totally disingenuous, and dangerous to boot. By asking it, you are skirting the deeper moral thinking that informed citizens should be doing right now.

"Why Syria?" would be my question, which is the fundamental question. If you really truly think this has anything to do with 400 some innocent people who were hit by sarin gas, and killed by that exposure, I have a chunk of land near a busy airport to sell you for a meditation center.

This country of ours sat by and supported the President of the Congo and 600,000 people were killed. Not one whimper out of Washington DC officials, not one.

But the Congo is a place we already control. Syria is a place we don't. And Syria is the only nation offering Russia a port for its Navy, and a land mass for other military uses.

The Congo and other nations where atrocities are being committed offer us nothing in terms of military strategy in the coming war against Iran. Nor do any other areas where atrocities are being committed figure into the "needed" pipeline for that region in the Middle East.

[Tiredofthesame]

90. Boom!

Home run.

[Summer Hathaway]

113. Yet another non-answer.

The question is VERY simple.

If any US president decides to engage in Syria, will it always be because they are pursuing the PNAC agenda, in furtherance of PNAC's goals?

It has been posted here many times over the past week that Obama is engaging in the Syria situation in pursuit of the PNAC plan.

Is this the case with every president from here on in? Or is it just Obama who, in dealing with Syria, is promoting PNAC's aims in doing so?

The answer should be simple enough.

[truedelphi]

118. If this question of yours is so simple, then why do you not

Answer it yourself?

[Summer Hathaway]

120. That's the thing.

I know the answer.

And so do you. Which is why you keep dancing around the issue.

[truedelphi]

122. I am not dancing around the issue.

You are looking at your "simple message" and "simple question." I am looking at the "meta message" and the "meta question."

I gave an answer to the meta message, and meta question in my reply number 62.

And in that reply I explained how I saw your "simple question" as being disingenuous, and therefore choose to not answer it.

[Summer Hathaway]

125. You continue to dance.

My Reply @#121 explains all. It was posted almost two hours before you responded to THIS post. You undoubtedly saw it - trying to buy more time?

If you are, as you allege, able to view things from a 'meta' standpoint, answering a 'simple' question should be easy enough. And yet you can't do so.

There is nothing "disingenuous" about the question I initially posed. It was very straightforward, and to-the-point.

Your inability to answer it is simply an unwillingness to do so - and we both know why.

[Summer Hathaway]

121. Apparently you

(and Loonix, to whom I first posed the question) are unable to answer.

Well, it's not so much "unable" as "unwilling" - and here's why:

Anyone with even a modicum of intelligence knows that a country like Syria can never be "untouchable" for all time based on the fact that it was targeted by PNAC. Global politics are an ever-evolving thing, and there can never be an "off limits" nation forever and ever, amen.

What you want to answer, but can't for the obvious reasons, is that if Obama engages Syria, he is following the PNAC agenda - but if any other president does so, whether he is doing so in furtherance of PNAC's goals will be determined based on whether YOU support that president or not.

The promotion of the idea that Obama = W is furthered by insinuating that Obama is "following the PNAC agenda". That is the ONLY reason PNAC is being cited here - and the purpose in doing so is completely transparent.

THAT is why you couldn't answer the simple question - because you couldn't say that ANY president who engages Syria would only be doing so in furtherance of the PNAC agenda (a ridiculous notion on its face), but at the same time, you couldn't admit that it is ONLY Obama who should be seen as doing so.

You painted yourself into that corner - and there was no way out of it. And I've enjoyed watching you twist in the wind trying to deflect attention away from a simple question, because you KNEW you couldn't answer it without exposing your own agenda.

[Vanje]

128. Who said Syria is to be "untouchable forever"?

I believe you've constructed yourself a little straw man.

If , in the wild universe of possibilities, say, Syria unleashed a hoard of rabid flying monkeys, onto the New Jersey shoreline , and those flying monkeys were aggressive, and carried jars of angry killer-bees, .....

.....well THEN, we could re-evaluate whether a military strike against Syria would be in the American people's interest, and not soley in the interest of PNAC.

These events are unlikely to arise.

[Summer Hathaway]

142. It was the question I asked

of those who were insistent that Obama engaging Syria was an obvious furtherance of PNAC's goals.

I wanted to know if they thought there was some kind of time limit, beyond which PNAC would no longer be an issue. I knew it was a question they wouldn't answer - because their real answer is that if it's Obama doing it, he's pursuing PNAC's goals. But if any other president in future does it, he won't be.

I knew they could never admit to that - which is why I got paragraphs and paragraphs of non-answers.

I didn't construct a strawman at all. It was a question. If I constructed anything here, it was a trap the Obama is embracing PNAC posters would recognize, and then dance around forever.

Which is exactly what they did.

[TheKentuckian]

143. The answer is most likely. Yes or no is not definitively possible in a world without

perfect prescience. Also, your time line is "ever", so in addition to perfect prescience absolute prescience is required.

The ability to peer down roads and around corners on a scale that dwarfs human history we all hope is required to answer your crazy broad question.

The further away from the general now the less certain the influence of current and recent players but let's start with a thirty year ban (minus direct attacks on us or our allies) and see how it plays out then, better yet...make it fifty or a hundred.

So no it sure isn't just Obama but it will be at least a generation pass before the insidious influence has subsided enough to give any credence to altruism in the region and fifty or a hundred years would be even more comfortable, maybe after that last barrel of oil and the last of the natural gas is gone will I buy a mercy mission meddling in the internal affairs of a middle eastern country unless they are attacking and occupying their neighbors without being a member of a truly global effort at the greatest need.

We've been a negative influence for decades in that region, no matter what our rationale for involvement has been. We don't make things better and we prop up awful dictators. Your perspective is far to small to be demanding absolute prediction spread over forever.

[Summer Hathaway]

145. I wasn't 'demanding an absolute prediction' at all.

The question was simple - and there were a number of possible answers, the most obvious being that things change over time, and no one can predict the future.

But I didn't get an answer. Because those queried didn't know how to say "If Obama does it, he's adopting PNAC's goals. But if another president does it, he won't be," without disclosing their own agenda.

Had anyone responded by saying "it depends on the circumstances", my follow-up question would be an obvious one as well: "What are the circumstances under which a president can engage Syria and NOT be following PNAC's agenda?" Which would have led to a certain contingent having to come up with valid reasons why Obama's actions would be PNAC-embracing, and in what circumstances a president taking the same action would not be.

And THAT explanation would have been a very amusing read. I'm almost sorry they didn't take the bait.

[Vanje]

127. Though you didnt address your question to me...

Let me have a whack at it.

The interests of US citizens are not served by military action into Syria.
The interests of PNAC ARE served by military action into Syria.

Presidents now and in the future who serve the interests of PNAC over the interests of the people, are pursuing PNAC's agenda.

Whether they do it purposefully or not, doesn't matter.

[Summer Hathaway]

130. So Syria is forever "off the table",

no matter what they may do in future, because they were named as a PNAC target?

A bunch of war-profiteering old white men included a country in their scheme, so that country is forever "untouchable", no matter what unfolds ten, twenty, fifty years from now?

Does that really make sense to you?

[Vanje]

136. Yes. Under present Circs

Off the table.

If circumstances change, such that the interests of the American people are served by a strike against Syria, I'd hope we could re-visit the issue.

[Summer Hathaway]

137. But that was the question I originally posed

whether Syria was forever off the table, despite what may unfold in the future.

I think for many the only "circumstance" that has to change is Obama not being the POTUS.

[Vanje]

139. I think you under-estimate your fellow DU members

horribly so.

[Summer Hathaway]

140. Not at all.

I read what they have to say, and the message is crystal clear.

The only reason PNAC was even mentioned in relation to Syria over the past few weeks was because it was a way to promote the Obama = Bush/Syria = Iraq line of bullshit.

Crystal clear.

[Vanje]

138. Jeeeeez. You and your, "Forever off the table"

If events change ssuch that falls within the interests of the American people, to attack Syria, that would be different.

If PNAC's interests were co-incident with the citizen's interest, there would be merit in revisiting the idea.

[L0oniX]

102. Iran is one of the 5 that Noam Chompsky has talked about.

http://www.democracynow.org/blog/2013/9/11/noam_chomsky_us_has_been_torturing_iran_for_60_years_since_1953_coup

[truedelphi]

110. Thanks for the links. And

here's yet another example of our media's blackout:

https://www.facebook.com/photo.php?fbid=202602969913837&set=a.129248193915982.24463.100004924055647&type=1&theater

[HangOnKids]

36. Send Him Some Hair Color For Men

I'm sure he would appreciate that! Oh and BTW hair turns gray as one ages, it has little to do with how heavily "it" weighs on him.

[iandhr]

38. I am aware of that.

Is has happened quickly for him is all I am saying. He did not have any grey hair when he first took office and started to grey about a month after he was elected.

[Blanks]

101. Maybe he dyed it before, and now he just doesn't have time. eom

[Vanje]

132. No don't!

Thick gray head of hair looks great.

[grahamhgreen]

70. Right. He failed to even address the issue of the MIC

[iandhr]

72. At this moment for to happen...

... Ike would have to rise from the dead.

[Summer Hathaway]

41. Well, credit where it's due ...

Grayson managed to hit all of the words and phrases that cause his followers to open their wallets:

"The military industrial complex, the neoconservatives like Dick Cheney, the foreign policy corporate-funded think tanks in D.C., the warmongers at the State Department - they wanted war, but you wouldn’t let them. We stood up for peace."

... and he managed to do it all in one sentence.

That's some fund-raising talent there.

My name is Alan Grayson - now gimme some money!

[L0oniX]

66. Let us know how all your favorite politicians get their campaign financing too while yer at it.

[Summer Hathaway]

67. Well, they don't do it

by running campaign ads where they 'edit' their opponent's statements, so that they appear to be saying the exact opposite of what they actually said.

They also don't do it by pointing to an unsourced article from The Daily Caller and citing it as a legitimate news source.

They also don't do it by posting an essay about the dire situation in Syria that is full of 'links' - all of which go to their own donation site.

They also don't publish nonsense about people have to eat spaghetti with their hands - I'm still trying to figure that last one out. Maybe it was some kind of fund-raising code or sumthin'.

[Vanje]

129. Yep.

Grayson is just in it for the money.

Doe he have boxes in his garage too?

[woo me with science]

42. +10000 And we need to KEEP doing it.

They are not finished with this campaign for war yet.

[Donald Ian Rankin]

45. Actually, it was Putin. N.T.

[L0oniX]

47. Shhhh ...don't let the BOG find out.

[Tx4obama]

49. Has Grayson released a figure for the total campaign money he raised off of the Syria issue yet?

If anyone is wondering what I'm talking about then just look at all the campaign fundraising hyper-links in his DU OP on the link below.

This one, here: http://www.democraticunderground.com/1251322031

A 'dozen' of the the purple hyper-links embedded in that OP go to a page to donate money to his re-election campaign fund!

I was shocked last week when I started clicking on those hyper-links to see additional info but received a 'give me money' page instead.

[Whisp]

51. The ones who gave and gave in to those tactics are now

forever on his side, hell or high water or any real facts. Committed.

[name not needed]

65. Any bets on when he goes the McKinney route?

[L0oniX]

63. The shame! He should know enough to get money the way everyone else does ...at the DC lobby trough.

[Left Coast2020]

78. Could it be possible he's stashing it away for.....

...future consideration of running for the White House?

I say that because I think he knows many people would be behind him.

He's just building his "brand name" for that day me thinks.

[Vanje]

131. I hope so!

I could very happily get behind a Grayson candidacy!

[bvar22]

56. DURec for Grayson.

A Democratic Party Leader who got it right.

[Zorra]

57. Hopefully we will have even better peace headlines within the next few weeks. nt

[AzDar]

59. Alan!

[yuiyoshida]

79. Agree!

[Art_from_Ark]

85. Hanashi wa chotto chigau kedo...

Heya no soji wa dou natteiru? Kirei ni narimashita?

日本からこんにちは

[yuiyoshida]

86. Watashi wa itsumo jibun no heya o soji shite imasu

Nihon-sama Gokigenyo!

[nikto]

93. Kokoro No Sports

Fushizen na girl.




The only Japanese language phrases I know are song titles by Yasutaka Nakata.

[yuiyoshida]

94. Arigatou!

I love perfume! Sankyuuuu!

[nikto]

115. As a long-time pop-music fan & part-time musician since the 1960s...

I have come to see Yasutaka Nakata as one of the best things to come
along in pop music since The Beatles.

If it is possible to describe a pop-song composer as a "genius", then Nakata is one.




Japan rocks like Godzilla.

[nikto]

116. In my opinion...

This song should be a worldwide #1 hit like The Beatles used to have:

[yuiyoshida]

119. Its too bad that there are those

people who say, :"if its not in English, its Junk." I really hate that attitude.

[nikto]

123. Yes, but at one time, lots of people used to say...

Eeeewww! Raw fish!

How could anybody eat that?

Nowadays it's...

"OK, I'll have the Tuna roll, with some yellowtail nigiri, and
an extra order of octopus nigiri...and..."


Music can cross boundaries, like food.

IMO, Yasutaka Nakata could be the musical equivalent of sushi & sashimi.

Time will tell.

Here's a truly incredible song, IMO (although I don't know Japanese):

(Musically, reminds me of Steely Dan Meets Stevie Wonder meets ?).

[yuiyoshida]

124. Nice sounds! Have you ever heard of Aural Vampire?

[nikto]

126. Interesting

But I still like Nakata's music the best because of the plentiful melodic hooks he writes.
Nakata packs a lot of melody in a relatively short song.

That appeals to an oldster like me (you know Geritol-swigging Beatles generation, born in the 50s).

And even though I am a bit leery of singers that don't exist (Vocaloid), I still became entranced
with some fine Vocaloid songs, including this epic disco-type tune "sung" by Hatsune Miku called "Meteor":

[yuiyoshida]

146. Have you ever seen this?

(Consert starts at 12:50)

[nikto]

147. In my mind...

Hatsune Miku is more real than Myley Cyrus.

Hatsune has far better songs, too.
Not even close.




Great Nakata site:

http://fuckyeahystk.tumblr.com/

[yuiyoshida]

155. I thought maybe

Nakata Yasutaka had a twitter account, but not seeing one.

[nikto]

160. Nakata is probably...

Way too busy writing and producing to tweet.

In the meantime----God, do I ever love this song by Meg:

[nikto]

117. Oh, ...And ALAN GRAYSON STILL ROCKS!!!!

Sorry for going OT on this very respectable thread.

[eridani]

60. I agree with the sentiment, but

--world public opinion surely helped a lot as well.

[libdude]

61. Still have

just a little bit of optimism that sometimes the American peoples voice is heard. Heard only because we had those in the Senate and House that on such a critical matter stood against all the pressure by the President, Sec. Of State, and corporate interests. Rep. Grayson was very clear on his opposition to the President's plan to use military force. Thanks.

[Vanje]

133. Grayson's interview on DEmocracy Now

got me off my ass, and writing and calling my congress-guys.

I heard our Senator interviewed on local TV news, that he received more calls and emails about Syria then for any other issue, ever.
The communications were 95% against Syrian strike.

[DeSwiss]

64. Damn tooten!

[grahamhgreen]

71. Well, I certainly agree! Well done peacenicks!!! (and keep up the pressure)

[kentuck]

74. That is a very interesting email from Rep. Grayson.

Sometimes I have a difficult time trying to figure out the good Congressman? Does he want to run for higher office? Does he want to do what is best for the people? Or is there a degree of narcissism there?

One thing for certain, he is a fighter and he is not afraid to speak his mind. I think we need more like him.

[treestar]

76. What peace?

It's getting so "peace" means the US not involved. There's still a war in Syria. What peace?

[Logical]

81. Kick! nt

[Barack_America]

83. No thanks, Alan, I've already got a car.

Runs real good.

[Union Scribe]

87. It's a shame how many are intent on dismissing

Grayson as well as the contribution of the democratic process in helping guide the development of our national response to the Syria crisis. These are always the same people telling us to take our gripes to our representatives. We did.

[L0oniX]

105. The DLC Dino club here isn't worth responding to anymore. They've moved way too far to the right...

and now they can't accept the big tent with lefties, progressives, anti-war and the OWS people.

[Vanje]

134. They're going to need a very VERY LARGE bus

in order to fit all those folks under it.
Its pretty much everyone now isnt it....except for Kerry, and Kissinger, maybe Bo, Sunny , Michelle, and the Obama girls.

[b.durruti]

149. Yep it's disgusting ~nt~

[avaistheone1]

88. Well done Congressman Grayson.

[blackspade]

89. Grayson Rocks!

[mattclearing]

91. I love Alan Grayson, but let's face facts: We did all this and more ten years ago.

The main difference is the team in the White House.

[MrModerate]

92. Certainly, the almost universal rejection of strikes by the American people . . .

Couldn't be ignored by the Administration.

But let's not forget how hysterical, reckless, and rumor-driven the media has become, so that every one of those shrieking headlines needed to be dialed down three-quarters of the way to even approach being the truth.

Media hysteria these days is almost as dangerous a force as wingnuttism.

[Douglas Carpenter]

98. knr

[99Forever]

100. Thank you Alan Grayson, for being the voice of...

... WE the People and applying sanity in a town filled with War Pigs and their enablers.

Please be our next President.

[Ocelot]

108. How refreshing... a politician who doesn't try to co-opt credit, unlike SOME

"You did this. Your calls and e-mails. Your pressure. The military industrial complex, the neoconservatives like Dick Cheney, the foreign policy corporate-funded think tanks in D.C., the warmongers at the State Department - they wanted war, but you wouldn’t let them. We stood up for peace."

K&R

[L0oniX]

109. Look up thread. They've already accused him of that in spite of the "You did this".

The DLC Dinos desperation comes out when they find a leftie in what they think is their big tent.

[Whisp]

111. How's the ca-ching going Alan?

Did Sister Sarah call and thank you for your endorsement of her dumbfuck world salad of Let Allah Sort Them Out?

How's thing in Richieland, pretty comfortable, eh?

[L0oniX]

112. I'm sure he has a lot more money than Obama ...right? pffft!

[Vanje]

135. Whisp, You're a great person,

no doubt.
Very plucky!

But that post was real lame.

[Whisp]

156. it might have been lame but it's the truth.

Grayson Did use Sarah's line of Let Allah Sort Them Out in one of his interviews on Syria.

And, he also he Did have links to his Donation Pay Pal page on talking about Syria - the links sounded like they were going to more information but went to his Money Page instead.

[b.durruti]

151. I stand with Alan Grayson! ~nt~

[gopiscrap]

152. I wrote and called my Congress Citters and sent a blanket email to the rest of them

[Smarmie Doofus]

153. Did I mention that Grayson is from the Bronx?

Say what? Only about four hundred times?

He's a hoooooooome boy!

[L0oniX]

157. Apparently he didn't like it there. Your loss our gain ...and we need him down here. Thanks much.

[Smarmie Doofus]

158. Believe me, you have NO idea.

>>>Your loss our gain >>>>

Look who's representing ME:




http://abcnews.go.com/blogs/politics/2013/02/rep-eliot-engel-will-introduce-legislation-to-allow-the-u-s-to-arm-syrian-rebels/