November 13, 2004

• WTF!? Let the meme die already.
• Everything is a meme. All your thoughts are "memes", they run deep in all of us. life is a meme. My computer is a fucking meme, Knowledge is a meme. Conversation?: memes reproducing. I think the Khmer Rouge phrased it best: "Destroy all communication networks."
• I, for one, would totally dig secession.
• kuatto, that was beautiful.
• Yeah. So? It doesn't mean we should discuss something that's already been discussed to death, doesn't it?
• (I'm not Cambodian, I'm a tired Canadian)
• I think the Khmer Rouge phrased it best: "Destroy all communication networks." They've found another meme.
• Pol Pot, Pol Pot, Pol Pot, Pol Pot .... This meme's got nothin'.
• meme meme meme let's go back to my room and we can do it all night...
• The groundswell of discontent following the Bush re-election is spawning some strange ideas, and one of them is spelled w-e-l-o-s-t-a-n-d-w-e-d-o-n-o-t-a-c-c-e-p-t-d-e-m-o-c-r-a-c-y
• All your thoughts are "memes" No.
• SHUTUPSHUTUPSHUTUP!
• Speaking of the bear flag, California really ought to change that. All the grizzlies were wiped out years ago.
• It doesn't mean we should discuss something that's already been discussed to death, doesn't it? If you don't think it's worth discussing, don't. Move on to a topic you do want to discuss. That's what I was told when I made "oh, no" comments about certain conversations when I first joined MoFi. Different people want to talk about different things. So what?
• Stirfry: do you consider the results of the election to be the product of a democratic process? I'm not so sure. My concept of democracy implies that people are well-informed and make rational decisions based on the facts. Polls indicate that a majority of Bush voters still believe that Iraq had WMDs, and that Saddam had Al-Qaeda ties. Secondly, in a democracy elections are fair. Which means that election officials are not partisans who employ dirty tricks. Like undersupplying democratic precincts with voting machines so that democrats have to wait in line 9 hours to vote.
• Speaking of the bear flag, California really ought to change that. All the grizzlies were wiped out years ago. You haven't seen me with my shirt off. w-e-l-o-s-t-a-n-d-w-e-d-o-n-o-t-a-c-c-e-p-t-d-e-m-o-c-r-a-c-y Actually, I haven't accepted the Electoral College since the first time I voted in '76. Because it is ANYTHING BUT Democracy.
• Stirfry's just trolling. Do not feed the troll.
• I have never been entirely clear what "trolling" is- but if it's defined as "daring to disagree with the majority" then I guess I am guilty too b/c Stirfry wrote almost exactly what I would have.
• It smells like a troll if the statement isn't qualified and has overtones of being snarky. The statement has no connection with secession, or there's been no followup to explain why there is one. /pedantics-semantics
• Thanks for the definition, Alex. In response to wendell, did Kerry win the popular vote?
• There's that word again. I may not agree with what stirfry said - to be honest I'm so tired of the whole thing that I just don't care - but I don't think he's trolling. There are always some unqualified statements on MoFi, and there's often snarkiness. Give stirfry a chance to respond - it is the weekend and therefore quieter here, after all - before throwing out the "troll" accusations.
• Lets start a campaign to have a picture of Wendell without a shirt put on the state flag. *salutes*
• In response to wendell, did Kerry win the popular vote? Did Bush win the popular vote in 2000? To answer your original post and get even further off-topic: It is interesting there is little discussion in the press of the wide variability of exit polls with voting tallies, other than to say that the exit polls were wrong. Why is this interesting? Because we can't say electronic voting tallies were right or wrong, since there is no process to allow audits. Our only conclusion is that all the exit polls — which are robust and usually statistically reliable as sin — must be wrong. This in a number of swing states, no less, where Kerry had been reported to be on the winning end. For a few exit polls to be incorrect is one thing — statistical noise — but for such a large disparity... Something's clearly not right. And the mainstream press is keeping its mouth shut about that topic, just like they never bothered to investigate Bush's WMD "evidence" and then apologized 12 months after the fact, well after anything could be done to keep us from fighting a war that is and will continue to cost us lives and dollars we need to fight wars back at home, like wars on poverty and illiteracy and hunger. Going from large numbers of statistical outliers to fraud is a big leap, but not inconceivable. At the very least, given the mass statistical incongruities, our press could do a huge public service by looking into the matter with just a tad more effort. Information makes for a strong democracy. "We won, so suck it" comments, notwithstanding.
• God damn, but I miss the vast right-wing conspiracy. Those were the days.
• Perhaps on the flag of The Republic of Cascadia? And we'd be more than willing to accept the best part of California into the fold. Some government posts are open as well.
• For a long time, I've thought of myself as a Californian before an American. Recently, even more so. I think secession would be great if we could get all of California to go. But I just don't think that's realistic. Good stuff for daydreaming, though.
• Wouldn't Republic of California just lead to a new excuse for electricity producers and electricity transmitters to hose California (and how!) yet again this summer? Not to mention natural gas exporters? Not that they really need excuses. But it makes things more convenient.
• You guys got the Terminator. You can do anything you want! lame and a bit drunk
• Tell you what. We'll trade youse guys Quebec, Economic Powerhouse of the North, for your crappy ol' California. Deal? Sweet. Call me.
• Tell you what. We'll trade youse guys Quebec and puhleeeze take Preston Manning, Ralph Klein and Stockwell Day* ;) *this list may change once we enter negotiations - also need to do something about that cascadia flag - looks too amurikin :) drjimmy might want to check out wikipedia's entry on trolls, flaming, Godwins Law etc if you haven't already. There is some good information there.
• In response to wendell, did Kerry win the popular vote? In the unlikely event that an investigation into voter fraud in Ohio turns that state over to Kerry, he'll win the election while losing the popular vote. That wouln't make me feel any better about the American System of insulating elected officials from the people, but I suspect it'd change your opinion. The Electoral College, 2-Senators-per-State, open-to-jerrymandering (which Dems do in CA, too), making-third-party-influence-virtually-impossible, plus the new paper-trail-free-voting machines are all part of a system that doesn't work. It doesn't work. It's broken. I knew that the first time I voted for President in 1976, and it has reached a point where the masters of gameplaying the system are on the verge of establishing a one-party system, and we can't stop them. Maybe if we wait until the Governator is inevitably rebuffed in his effort to get an Amendment to let him run for President (and he realizes the Mullahs In Power don't want him), he'll help lead the California Secessionist movement. Just not right now. Of course, I'd be honored to have my picture on the California flag, but me without my shirt on may be NSFW (not because of the hair), and that would close down all the state governmental offices. (And that's a bad thing?)
• Information makes for a strong democracy. "We won, so suck it" comments, notwithstanding. Right on, Alex Reynolds!
• Sorry for the serial post, but: . . . and vigorous debate is central to democracy. It should be encouraged, not discouraged. Again (and this is just my advice; you're welcome to say whatever you want in my book), if you're not into a discussion here, skip it and move to one you are into.
• Vigorous debate is most certainly central to democracy. But foot-stomping temper tantrums are hardly what qualifies as debate, as vigorous and petulant as they may be. I'm no fan of the Electoral College way of doing things but if vote fraud of a scale to give Ohio to Kerry is uncovered, it would mean that it might take 8 years to get rid of Kerry whereas it'll take 4 to get rid of Bush. So my advice to you who can't and won't accept this election's results, is to get over it, suck it up, and get on with organizing and convincing those who don't agree with you. You've already convinced those who have the same opnion as you do.
• Amen, stirfry.
• stirfry: So you'll be the one to decide what qualifies as worthwhile debate and what doesn't?
• I'd be happy to engage in one if I ever saw one about to take place. "Bush is an asshole and I can't stand the fact that he won this election." Is that the kind you had in mind?
• Whatever you decide, stirfry. Really, without being snide, the only point I've been trying to make in this thread is that people shouldn't stifle others' conversation. IMO what's happening here in political threads of late is people working through their feelings and thoughts before deciding what to do next. And there's nothing wrong with that.
• And my apologies to little nemo for not responding to the question. The loudest voices get the most press in politics at any level, including this one. On the national scale, money buys airtime so I'd say that the results of this and most other elections, except perhaps those on a local level, are somewhat removed from being the product of a democratic process. How can we change that? You said: "My concept of democracy implies that people are well-informed and make rational decisions based on the facts." My boss is a Mormon and a close co-worker is a fundamentalist Christian. They're intelligent people whose political viewpoints are almost entirely directed by their religious views. That's why they voted for Bush even though I thought I had the owner convinced that Bush was the greater evil because of his adventurist foreign policy as well as fiscal irresponsibility. But since he pretends to be a Christian, and I believe he does only pretend, they voted for him. So tell me how to create a well informed electorate that makes rational decisions based on the facts. They voted according to how they saw those facts.
• HawthorneWingo...I don't see it that way. You assume that everyone has the same feelings to be worked through and it should be an agreeing sort of conversation, a kind of commiseration. Maybe so, but then where's the debate? Do we need to label threads "agree or don't post"?
• You assume that everyone has the same feelings to be worked through and it should be an agreeing sort of conversation, a kind of commiseration. No, I don't. Do we need to label threads "agree or don't post"? Not at all, stirfry. But we -- myself included, I absolutely admit -- need to do a bit more of not trying to shut down voices with which we disagree, or which are saying things we already have firm opinions on. I think forums like this are naturally both a place for real debate AND a sounding board or place to work through your thoughts. My own personal mantra moving forward is going to be "really listen," followed by "think before you hit 'post'," followed by "respect others but don't let them stop you from calling it like you see it."
• And now, to lighten the mood... Mutant Kitties! 3 links, and no, they're not really mutants.
• Of course, I'd be honored to have my picture on the California flag, but me without my shirt on may be NSFW (not because of the hair)