November 01, 2006

• Wow. I'm destroying everything that's sacred! Go me!
• Oh, come on. This can't be real. If it is real, let me guess.. Republican?
• I didn't think it was real either until i went to his site (last link). Sad but true.
• The scariest part is that this guy represents the political thinking of just over HALF the population of the United States.
• While I was watching TV last night, there were two commercial blocks in a row that were nothing but ill-tempered political ads. If that Hugh Laurie weren't so darned handsome I'd have turned off the set.
• Hugh Laurie is handsome? Maybe I stepped into the wrong fucking universe some time back...
• Maybe more "intriguing" than handsome.
• This Vernon chap seems a bit nasty - why would people vote for him? *blinks, whimpers* As for Hugh Laurie, I'm a big fan of his earlier work, like A Bit of Fry & Laurie. Hugh Laurie for Congress?
• briank, if you mean that just over 1/2 are republican, seemingly, yes. but not all republicans agree with many of the premises touted by that charmer Vernon R. my parents are generic republicans but they are not anti-gay (hey, they live in new jersey!) nor or they anti-black single parents...etc. many moderate repubs are increasingly disenchanted with the rampant insanity of the present admin, I just hope that shows strongly enough next week!
• In fact, some moderate Republicans have become so angry with guys like this that they have switched parties.
• I've seen this guy's ads before. He was wearing this shirt. OK, not really. But he's the kind of douchebag who would.
• I want to raise an issue with those encouraged by the Republicans switching because they are fed up. Before this quackery that landed on our doorstep with the neo-cons, there were some real issues taking place between Dem and Reps. When these Reps become Dems they make old school Reagenomics a Dem position, which it is not. If these guys want to give up the Rep party they need to start their own, not infiltrate the Democrats and make their position the Democrats, essentially you will move the Democratic more right, but not as right as the neo-cons. Then you are left with old school Republicans running the Democrats or at least influencing it, and neo-cons become the new Republicans. Another problem is, with all the quackery that came with Rove, do you really trust anyone coming out of the Republican side. Not to sound paranoid, but in weak states these Republicans could just be pandering. They call themselves Dems but how will they vote in congress? To be honest I am not voting. I honestly want it all to crumble. It is too twisted and fucked to bring anything resembling a democracy back. Remember when campaign finance reform was an issue. Remember when McCain was one of the good guys? I really believed a thorough reform of campaign finances would recreate the functions of our democracy. The fact this is no longer even discussed and we don't even know if our vote is counted has crossed into the absurd. The fact that Bush has not only repealed Habeas Corpus but also passed a bill where he can pretty much recruit any police force in the nation, is mind boggling. Let it fail. It needs to fail. When it comes to the neo-con position and the sheeple that follow it and vote for it, I have one little colloquialism "Beware of what you ask for, you just might get it."
• Amen, glamma. It is failing, and I am leaving. I cant put up with where America is headed anymore. I just cant deal with it. To Canada~!
• The scariest part is that this guy represents the political thinking of just over HALF the population of the United States. Gross oversimplification, and the kind of thinking that's fodder for people who think liberals are whining, the-sky-is-falling! types. The actual percentage is probably more like 10 or 15 percent. Which is plenty frightening enough, actually.
• Okay, maybe 20 percent.
• essentially you will move the Democratic more right I don't see that as a bad thing. It will make them more electable. A centrist party with majority power is better than a leftist party in minority to neocons.
• I don't see that as a bad thing. It will make them more electable. A centrist party with majority power is better than a leftist party in minority to neocons. I am thinking more long term. In this two party system the middle ground is only measured by where the poles for the view points are placed. If at one point in time they were at 5 and -5 the median was zero. If it is changed to 0 and 10 the median then becomes 5. This means Reaganomics will become the median politics, then of course we can slip farther 8 years from now. The leftist voice slowly gets drowned out until, universal health care and campaign finance reform become terms Commies use, and prosecutable as treason. That was a little dramatic but not impossible.
• I am thinking of the Chappelle skit where Chappelle is blind Klansman who does not realize his is black. I expect Vernon will have one of those moments.
• i love how this guy is running in north carolina and is promising to secure the borders. from whom? tennessee? south carolina?
• Securing the borders has come up in Indiana too. I don't know why. I hear a lot more people speaking Cantonese than I do Spanish around here (of course I'm in a college town, so your mileage may vary). The one that just dumbfounds me that it is an issue at all is flag burning. When is the last time you saw a flag burning? I did a google news search on flag burning and the only thing that I found were reports of flag burning in the UK, some anti-immigration guy burning a Mexican flag (I wonder how Vernon feels about that?) and some teacher that burned a flag in class as a lesson about freedom of expression. I know I've seen a whole lot more flag burning in the political commercials the last two months than I have the rest of my life.
• They're talking about securing the borders here in PA, too. Odd. I'm not sure that not participating in the process will help it fail, glamma. I think it may just help the people you oppose win. But then, I've been accused of being too optimistic (I will admit that it's nice to live in a state where a Dem has a snowball's chance of being elected!). Also, about the Repubs who have switched parties in Kansas I don't see them moving the Dem party to the right. Kansas Dems are already pretty conservative (as are Dems from many states -- they're just conservative in a different way from Republicans, or conservative rather than radically right), and I get the feeling that these politicians felt that they were moving to a party that was little different from their own philosophy and that also lacked the influence of the far right. (In many cases, I think that the far right has come to dominate the Repubs as a way to differentiate themselves from the Dems in states where both parties share many similarly conservative views.)
• You Pennsylvanians should watch out. It's only one state away from Canada, and once those guys get into New York, I'm not sure we can hold 'em back.
• James Moore, co-author of the new book “The Architect: Karl Rove and the Master Plan for Absolute Power” interviewed on Democracy Now! I think, Amy, the thing that people need to know, as we go into next Tuesday, about Mr. Rove and the people that he leads in the Republican Party is that there is virtually nothing he will not do to continue to retain power and to win an election. Now, am I accusing Karl of being willing to do something illegal, unethical or immoral? He has done all of those things in the past. It would not be anything new. In my heart, I hope that -- I want to believe that even Karl Rove, if he got to the point where he was doing something that was to violate the sanctity of our electoral process, he would back away from it, but I think everyone should be very, very concerned, and there should be attorneys in every one of the congressional districts in this country ready to file appeals, because I believe we’re going to see a very ugly Election Day with lost data discs, voter suppression, people turned away from the polls who shouldn’t be, and it’s going to be an ugly day, I’m afraid.
• One of the lessons which Hitler has taught us is that it is better not to be clever. The Jews put forward all kinds of well founded arguments to show that he could not come to power when his rise was clear for all to see. I remember a conversation during which a political economist demonstrated - on the basis of the interests of the Bavarian brewers - that the Germans could not be brought into line. Other experts proved that Fascism was impossible in the West. The educated made it easy for the barabarians everywhere by being stupid. The farsighted judgments, the forecasts based on statistics and experience, the comments beginning "this is a subject I know very well," and the well-rounded, solid statements, are all untrue. Hitler was opposed to mind and to men. But there is also a spirit which is opposed to the interests of men: its characteristic is clever superiority.
• Last post was from Horkheimer and Adorno "Dialectics of Enlightenment." Notes and Drafts Pg 209.
• Jack Horkheimer, Star Hustler?

• "(k) The flag, when it is in such condition that it is no longer a fitting emblem for display, should be destroyed in a dignified way, preferably by burning."

  Oh, America! You so crazy! To Canada~! No, thanks. We don't take kindly to quitters.
• Ah, fuck it. Just hurry up before someone sees, and keep yer goddamn shoes off in the house.
• Oh geez, thanks eh
• This is the confusing bit about the flag: "(i) The flag should never be used for advertising purposes in any manner whatsoever. It should not be embroidered on such articles as cushions or handkerchiefs and the like, printed or otherwise impressed on paper napkins or boxes or anything that is designed for temporary use and discard." Isn't this rule broken constantly?
• Yes.
• I still have some kitschy candles in my bathroom with Lady Liberty and the American flag all over them. I've even burned them!
• Isn't this rule broken constantly? I'd initially say yes, but I've never scrutinized any of those flags to the point brought up in the link to verify if they were actually a perfect manifestation (in dimension and content) of any incarnation of the American flag or just metaphorical. Wikipedia opines. Another take on flag desecration [coarse language and the best Lincoln ever]. According to the 11 very specific authorized dimesions, maybe this rule isn't broken that much?