December 08, 2003

• The classic children's book icon, Grandfather Twilight, broke twenty years of silence to endorse Congressman Dennis Kucinich for President in 2004. (Found via diepunyhumans.)
• I'm assuming you mean that this would be exploiting the victims/families of the victims. If that's the question you pose: I would say that it's the Bush administration doing the exploitation. Besides, the names, ages and hometowns of coalition casualties are listed in a variety of places including CNN.
• I agree with I~S~. There are no lies in this commercial, thus it seems a fair advertisement. It is a clear annoucement of the facts Dennis Kucinich feels to be important.
• And. but. so... These are my favorite ads for Kucinich.
• I would LOVE to see this on a break before a nightly news program, but I won't. Nor will you. Networks wouldn't run it (fear of the FCC). Candidates wouldn't release it (this is going WAY negative; ALL the others would blast him outta the water). Most voters wouldn't get it (they think embracing the ad's content would somehow make the soldiers think we didn't "support" them, as opposed to finding flaws with the military's masters..). If I'm wrong (and that would be marvelous), I'll buy everyone Pop Tarts.
• I don't think its the FCC I'd fear so much as the Bush-Lovin' parent who saw their kids name flash past. Of course the benefit of being the no-chance-in-hell canidate is you do the craziest thing you can think of.
• Well, MoFi was doing well not posting political crapola. I don't suppose we can avoid becoming another MetaFilter.
• Well, MoFi was doing well not posting political crapola. I don't suppose we can avoid becoming another MetaFilter. Fair enough I suppose, f8xmulder, but it's not like we should completely avoid talking about politics. I'd like to think that we could talk about politics without getting snarky and bitchy, using MeFi as an object lesson of What Not To Do, as far as political "discussion" goes. Of course, we actually could choose to Just Say No to Politics. I'm not advocating for it, but it is an option. (One which I'd feel better about if I was also a MeFi member and could post there about it if I wanted.)
• f8xmulder: I am not sure I see what is wrong with posting political topics. If you don't care about politics, don't read them. This being said, I would love to see more international political posts. Other than the big players like The Guardian, I don't know too many foreign media outlets, but would love to see opinion/editorial posts from them.
• I believe it is irresponsible to try and divorce politics from any aspect of life. Political acts form the framework for how we live day to day. Not to mention WHO lives day to day. I understand why one may wish to avoid political discussions, they can be real downers, make people question their beliefs etc, etc, but vigorous debate is neccessary to the health of democracy and should never be considered taboo in any forum.
• Woohoo! The "if you don't like it, don't read it" argument! Seriously, I agree with Nickdanger.
• I think thats what they need to stay though - discussions and debate - not empty rhetoric and insults between people who aren't even prepared to listen to each other. Thats the thing we need to avoid - how we do avoid it though, I don't really know, except for suggesting politeness.
• tracicle, i wasn't trying to be snarky or coy in my 'don't read theads you don't care about' post. why should anybody read a post they don't care about? i agree with dng about the value of politeness.
• I'm not opposed to political threads and discussions, but given how they tend to break down quickly into a partisan bash session rather than informed and constructive debate, I'd just as soon leave them on MeFi. Granted that doesn't give us (who have no MeFi voice as of yet) much opportunity to voice our opinions, but I have to admit it was a welcome change to come here and not have to endure PoliticsFilter squared. But you all have very valid points which are more than appropriate.
• Why do you hate America, fx8mulder?
• Well, I don't think it's irresponsible to decide that we're not going to talk about politics, but I do disagree about the "if you don't like it don't read it" argument to a certain extent, when it comes to politics, at least the "partisan bash sessions" as f8xmulder puts it. It's one thing to have topics you're not interested in or have nothing to say about so you avoid those posts, but it's another thing for there to be conversations that are hostile to a point of view that you have — hostile to the point that any attempt to show your viewpoint brings down a hostile barrage of vitriol and sarcasm (which is what has happened on MeFi when it comes to politics). Really, I'm not against talking about politics, and this is a bit of premature "the sky is falling" talk, but I guess I do worry about what will happen to our little simian utopia when we have uncharted problems.
• Wow. That first sentence above makes almost no sense. I hope you get what I mean.
• I think the problem that happens on metafilter might be linked to the binary, two party, left-right thing which seems to be very prevalent in American politics. See, in third world countries (like Canada), we have realised how much fun it is to have more than two parties and to spawn and merger political parties daily! You never have to worry about it breaking down into a left right debate, because there are 5 different options, no wait 4, no wait 5... (and that's not even counting the littles.) So, whenever it looks like politics on MonkeyFilter are getting too bogged down in pointless debates, let's just all find our inner Rhinocerosness and remember that the only good politician is one that doesn't want to be there.
• See, in third world countries (like Canada), we have realised how much fun it is to have more than two parties and to spawn and merger political parties daily! Or you can have it in England, where we have right, right and rightish. Go democracy!
• Hey, Fox! Just wait until we get on to Christianity!
• I was troubled by the commercial when I saw it. I'm against the war in Iraq because I felt the job wasn't finished in Afghanistan and Osama bin Laden hasn't been brought to justice. I also didn't have a great deal of confidence in Donald Rumsfeld. I think the ad would hurt the Democratic Party. Karl Rove could this the same way as the Democrats haved used Bush's flight suit pr stunt.
• Just a reminder, but if politcial threads do start to turn things ugly here, there is always WarFilter.
• Blaise: You got me [throws up hands in air] certainsome1: Yes, upon hindsight, my complaint was hasty (as Treebeard put it) and is a little too "sky is falling" sounding, so for that, I probably should have held my tongue. Nevertheless, I do believe that becoming MeFi on political discussions is a danger, because it is such a volatile subject. Like religion. jb: Thanks for that bit of sanity. Though I don't know much about Canadian politics, your example is refreshing. Wolof: Oy, I promise not to engage anyone on that unless first engaged. And even then I'm keeping it on LiteFM. I've been in too many religious debates to think I'm going to make any difference in someone's opinion of what I may or may not believe.
• I don't see any problem conceptually with Kucinich's advertisement, nor any reason why he should be unable to have it aired, provided he pays for his time like everyone else, etc. Kucinich has a special, priviledged position right now - as a candidate whose likelihood of winning the nomination is very slim, he has an opportunity to say *whatever he thinks* without real worry over backlash. By proxy, it is Kucinich's (and others') voices who at this time should serve as the conscience of the Democratic Party during the time where they will be knifing each other trying to get the nomination. In regard to the Mefi-snipery: it was one of the reasons I left there, that the two sides of the debate (of which, I must admit, I often hold the right-wing one) could not debate without rancor. It is my hope and belief that we can do so without such bile here, else we end the same: with what I believe to be the exodus of intelligent, well-meaning people on both sides (I count myself among the latter; the jury is still out on the former). That said, as for the content of the ad? Well, for one, if I was an executive with any of those companies, and this ad aired implying that I, theough my company, suborned the killing of American servicemen? I'd be mad as hell, and I might be prompted to sue. Secondly: although Bush has not been shy about kowtowing to big corporations, I don't think his actions are any different in theory than what the Deomcrats do for the unions and lawyers' organization (primarily - the list of benficiaries of government largesse is long, varied and distinguished on both sides). Also, if it was about oil. why not go after Libya's fields as well, since they are of late trying the buy their way back into the good graces of the world with exactly that (Europe said "welcome Libya," while the US has maintained its sanctions, iirc). The difference here is one of timeing and situation. To imply that the war in Iraq is at the behest of these companies grossly oversimplifies the political realities of the post-9/11 world, borders on slander to those executives and employees of those companies (people who, like perhaps you and I, have integrity *and* work for a corporation), while finishing with a rhetorical question that, in rather childlike simplicity, both pretends to eliminate the complexity of the situation while extrapolating a statistical bodycount that (as most of us who have an inkling of statistics know) is pretty much right out of his butt. Much as we all would like the situation to be as simple and straightforward as Kucinich purports in his ad, it is not. And like a great many of those who point the finger and declare opposition, it is long on charges and short on solutions. What would happen, indeed, if we all wre to do what Kucinich seems to suggest and simply leave Iraq? Would that embolden terrorists, or chasten them? Would that help, or harm, the Iraqis? I wonder.
• See, in third world countries (like Canada), we have realised how much fun it is to have more than two parties and to spawn and merger political parties daily! Bah. What a pathetic excuse for a 3rd world country. See, back in India, there are about... [still counting...] 500+ parties. Silly things like ideologies and principles can be dispensed off in the speeches. But that's not a problem. Each politician has a going rate for vote on a Bill, for a press statement, for a campaigning visit...etc. All it takes is the sight of a signed check to start a stampede. Paypal should consider setting up a special service for Indian politicians. They can even call it PayPol.
• By the way, Jason Kottke recently posted these guidelines for learning, which, if followed correctly, ensure a friendly, polite argument in which flaming is kept to a minimum and learning on both sides is maximised. They're useful to check up on before you dive into a difficult issue, and, if I had my way, would be distributed by law with every single modem sold on the planet.
• I think what Fes says is pretty accurate (not least about the statistics and the "making Bush's friends rich" slogan, and the subliminal flashing of OIL behind the question "for what?" seemed a bit odd too). Blaise Bailey Finnegan, that list of guidelines is quite good. I think the main reason that discussions descend into abuse is that diplomacy is so much harder on the Internet (due to the lack of interaction compared with actually talking to people).
• Kucinich has a special, priviledged position right now - as a candidate whose likelihood of winning the nomination is very slim, he has an opportunity to say *whatever he thinks* without real worry over backlash. You mean backlash in the upcoming Pres. election? Coz if he runs the ad and then runs in an election where he a non-trivial chance of winning, it might be used against him. I'm sure he's thought along that angle. Or maybe, he hasn't.
• /looks behind and wonders what happened to the others
• We are strolling at a leisurely pace. Taking time to smell the Kucinich and all that.
• i ♥ dennis kucinich
• *Stops to smell the Kucinich. Wow, this was fresh and full of promise...two years ago. Shucks. *Wonders where Kucinich is now.
• Wonder if he found a wife out of the whole deal