Add Comment  |  Previous Week  |  Text-Only Comment Room  |  Comment Room Information

TGS WebSite  |  TGS MirrorSite  |  Current Episode

You guys are evil..... ;)
Dezi
Monday, November 8, 2004 11:02:41 AM
IP: 68.57.196.146

ANyone still up? Can you please look outside? I am in the middle of the frelling city, I can't see the stars but I can see the northern lights/
Fire Storm
Monday, November 8, 2004 02:12:57 AM
IP: 68.21.47.114

Gside: <and just about any recent meme, I recommend the Sensible Erection RPG.>
That IS a pretty sweet game. I have already won it and I just may play it again.
Great waste of a good week, AND it's free!

CHECK IT OUT! CHECK IT OUT!
$PLUG$
(Now that I have it advertized here... I can get a nRage code!)
Fire Storm - [<--- Sensible Erection RPG]
Monday, November 8, 2004 12:55:28 AM
IP: 65.114.91.3

Patrick> <<I already lost some brain cells picturing James Bond playing the xylophone>>: It's not my fault that a superspy and an astronomer have the same last name. Anyone could mix them up when they're tired enough.

HoE> <<Unless Douglas Adams's theory is correct, and God is a senile old man>>: Which book was that in? Closest I remember them coming to God was seeing his last words to his creation.

Fire Storm> <<Several mentions of "Badger, Badger, Badger" and not ONE link?>>: There's already been a link to Weebl's stuff, where it also resides.

And if you want more badges, snakes, mushrooms, and just about any recent meme, I recommend the Sensible Erection RPG.

Na zdorov'ya.
Gside - [gside@comcast.net]
Fair Haven, NJ
Sunday, November 7, 2004 11:04:30 PM
IP: 68.83.187.89

Several mentions of "Badger, Badger, Badger" and not ONE link?

For SHAME!

This shall be fixed NOW!
Minister Fire Storm - [<--- He who is blessed shall click the link]
Sunday, November 7, 2004 08:51:21 PM
IP: 65.114.91.3

HoE>>Gside: <Dezi> <<I thought I had rid my brain of that song>>: It never leaves forever.> Indeed, Dezi. Haven't you learned anything from "Badger, badger, badger"?

You forgot 'mushroom, mushroom' and 'snaaaaaaaaake!'

Er. Yeah. I'm back now. Damned essays. 2500 words of rotting my brain out...
Draconis Mk IV
UK Sunday, November 7, 2004 12:47:53 PM
IP: 213.249.240.244

DPH: There might be passages in the Bible that say homosexuality is a sin, but remember there are also passages in the Bible that say women are property. Times change. We know it, and I'm pretty sure God knows it. He'd better know it. Unless Douglas Adams's theory is correct, and God is a senile old man. Douglas Adams, may he rest in peace.

Gside: <Dezi> <<I thought I had rid my brain of that song>>: It never leaves forever.> Indeed, Dezi. Haven't you learned anything from "Badger, badger, badger"?

Harvester of Eyes - [Minstrel75@aol.com]
Fredericksburg, VA, USA
Sunday, November 7, 2004 12:36:31 PM
IP: 69.174.23.52

Gside > Too slow on the correction... I already lost some brain cells picturing James Bond playing the xylophone.

The leaves are raked, the new snowblower has been fired up and tested, the air leak around the back door has been repaired, and the storm windows are up. That completes this weekend's to-do list, so now I have the whole day to work on fanfic. Huzzah!

If you check your calendars, you'll notice today is the 7th. And that means we're down to the final month of our ten-year wait. 30 days left until the spell is broken and they live again! Gargoyles Season One comes to DVD on December 7, 2004!
Patrick
Sunday, November 7, 2004 11:01:19 AM
IP: 68.170.199.45

Me> <<Roger Moore>>: Whoops, that should be Patrick Moore.
Na zdorov'ya.
Gside - [gside@comcast.net]
Fair Haven, NJ
Sunday, November 7, 2004 09:25:40 AM
IP: 68.83.187.89

Yeah, I didn't post last night. Got too tired too early.

HoE> <<Kenya sounds more appealing>>: But Roger Moore plays the xylophone.

Dezi> <<I thought I had rid my brain of that song>>: It never leaves forever.

Patrick> <<the earth is only about 4,000 years old>>: I thought it was 6000.
<<slavery is okay>>: Who doesn't want someone to bring them mint juleps when they sname their fingers?
<<we shouldn't eat pork>>: No one's taking my bacon.
<<the New Testament doesn't say a single thing about homosexuality>>: "Love your neighbor as yourself". Well, I've indulged in a good bit of self love, so therefore...

Na zdorov'ya.
Gside - [gside@comcast.net]
Fair Haven, NJ
Sunday, November 7, 2004 12:22:00 AM
IP: 68.83.187.89

GXB - I couldn't get into the military because of a pre-existing physical condition. Ever since I was involved in an automobile accident a few years ago (and I've been seeing a chiropractor), I've had back problems. And just so you don't think I'm making this up, you can check cr archives where I've mentioned visiting the chiropractor before, lots of times. I have to visit once a month.
DPH
AR, USA
Saturday, November 6, 2004 04:38:11 PM
IP: 67.14.195.48

Dezi's lj friend>> <there's nothing more we can do [in Iraq]> Nothing more we can do????? No offense Dezi, but this person seems a little short sighted. He/she is suggesting that after ripping the country apart and decending it into a civil war that we just pull up stakes and leave. Were we to do that, the killing would go on in ernest. The "insurgants" wouldn't stop just because the U.S. military left. They'd roll back into bagdad and kick out the recently established democracy and then we'd be right back where we started. Only this time, Iraq really would be a threat. people seem to be under the impression that if Kerry had been elected president the U.S. would leave Iraq the next day. I never heard him say that. He always said it was a mistake he wouldn't have made. In reality, Kerry would have had to continue the war for some time. Sure, he'd be looking for a quick finish to the conflict. He might have even won over some more allies to help bring it to a close. But there would still be more death. Even when the war is over, it's likely that we will leave a garrison there for years to come. basically what i'm saying is that there is still a lot more to do in and about Iraq before the situation is fixed and we can safely leave.
Mecord
Saturday, November 6, 2004 12:08:02 PM
IP: 67.40.106.231

Aaron> "I'm so sick and tired of hearing about these poor, put-upon doctors who're being hounded out of existence by trial lawyers. Maybe, if they'd quit taking three days a week off to play golf, quit prescribing drugs based on which pharmacutical company sent them on an all-expenses paid junket to the Bahamas, and started doing something to actually cure diseases instead of treat symptoms, they wouldn't be so bad off."

So now, I think I have a right to feel pretty defensive about this. First of all, what planet is this guy living on? Three days a week off to play golf? Tell that to the residents who work sixteen hours a day and are on call every second or third day. Tell that to the emergency room physicians who work nightmare shifts with little to no sleep. Heck, tell that to the doctors who push themselves so hard treating patients who do nothing to take care of their own health that they burnout by age forty-five. Or the doctors who end up abusing substances or committing suicide; did you know that doctors are among the highest-risk groups for that? No, I bet you didn't. Cause, you know, we're out there playing golf all the time, and it's so hard not being able to get the right yardage that we don't have time to think about medicine and stuff. I don't even like golf.

Second of all, I know no doctors who have taken an all-expenses paid junket to the Bahamas paid by Merck or Pfizer or Apotex. I have seen – actually, scratch that, I've just finished studying for a test where we had to memorize the effects and the side effects and profiles of drugs, in some hope that I'll understand how rational prescription works. Whether you think so or not, drug companies do not have doctors in their pocket, and we are capable of critical thinking based on the efficacy and reports of thr drugs we prescribe. Dr. Nancy Olivieri in Toronto is famous for standing up to Apotex and pulling out of a clinical trial because the drug they suggested was dangerous, and as a result, it's off the market. And that's what we do. Nobody trusts drug reps; we make our own decisions, using critical thinking and scientific, peer-reviewed literature. Do you honestly think I'm going to prescribe you a dangerous heart medication knowing that it's dangerous and knowing that it won't help you, just because a drug company tried to give me a free pen? And shall we talk about the patients who come in demanding a pill to fix their problems? "Give me an antibiotic!" they cry, knowing full well their disease is viral and that an antibiotic won’t do a damned thing. "Give me pills for this, this and this!" they scream, wanting magic bullets for their high blood pressure and cholesterol and blood sugar, unwilling to stop eating fatty foods or stop smoking. But you know what? Not every patient is like that, and many of the ones that are will be quite agreeable if you explain why you're making the decisions that you are. Lumping all of the patients together in one group and saying "they're all like this" would be pretty ignorant, don’t you think? Hint, hint.

We treat symptoms, yeah, and we should be better at looking at things holistically, but you know what? Sometimes signs and symptoms are all we have to go on, and sometimes managing signs and symptoms are all we can do. Let's go back to diabetes. Say you ate fatty, sugary food all your life, and now you have insulin-independent diabetes. Your red blood cells are powdered with sugar, your blood pressure's through the roof, and you've got tingling and weakness in your feet from nerve damage. The disease is caused by decreased sensitivity of the glucose receptors in your cells; for some reason, your cells don't take in the normal amount of sugar. What exactly do you expect us to do? We can put you on metformin to try and improve your cells' sensitivity to glucose, but that takes time and it doesn't always work. In the meantime, we can give you diet and activity advice, we can manage your blood pressure with medication, and we can give supportive therapy to make sure the nerve damage doesn't get any worse. Is that treating the symptoms instead of the disease? Well, duh. But the symptoms are controllable, whereas it's a lot harder to fix the receptors on every cell in your body. Believe me, if we could snap our fingers and fix it, we could, but short of that, or of gene therapy twenty, thirty years down the line, there's not much more we can do but treat symptoms. Heaven forfend we do that, though. Cause you know, we're not treating the disease.

It's been rare for me to see blatant cases of doctor-bashing like this, and I confess: it pisses me off. Maybe you had a bad experience with a doctor, or know someone else who did. If you have, then my heart goes out to you – but lay off the stupid generalizations, eh? I went into medicine to help people, not to play golf or jet off to Bermuda on GlaxoSmithKline's dollar. I'm not lazy; I worked damn hard to get where I am, and I work damn hard to make sure that my patients get the best possible care from me because that's my frigging job. I am there to help them become well and stay well. If you have a problem with a particular doctor, then by all means, see that it's addressed. Don't take it out on me, or on my friends and colleagues, or the thousands of other physicians out there who spend the better part of their careers addressing the problems and concerns of others because they genuinely think they can help people make positive changes in people's lives.
Whitbourne
Saturday, November 6, 2004 07:39:19 AM
IP: 142.177.158.101

Dezi> Ah, but there's the problem, you want folks to think logically about an emotional issue or a set of emotional issues. I see this not really a struggle on the grounds of morals, but more an appeal to emotional reasoning. That type of reasoning doesn't require thought or evaluation, though many do engage in that. It only requires you to have a position. It does even require you to defend your position, because 'faith' trumps all logical arguments.

I will say you should hold your ire. Legistlating morality is a no-win situation (anyone whose done speech and debate knows this) 1st, in such a diverse population as ours, no one has the authority to select a standard that everyone will abide by. 2nd, politics is a creature of convienence. Morality to be valid needs to be consistant. The two will eventually reach a contradiction. It may be convienent to argue sanctity of life with abortion, but not with the death penalty, as an example.

Greg> I agree that the church's should be prepared to pay the price. I have no problem with clergy backing a candidate or an issue, but when you use the pulpit to drum out that message that as bad a Sinclair hijack the public airwaves for its on political ads. A clear line needs to be drawn and swift, stiff penalties must be enforced on this.
Taleweaver
Saturday, November 6, 2004 03:02:05 AM
IP: 209.179.168.52

Man I wish I could post more often. As it is I miss out on a lot of discussion and only get a chance to weigh in.

On Same-Sex marriage, I see the reach was overextending its grasp. On the legal issue with government they were on solid ground. Not just on Equal Protection but alson on DOMA, the defense of marriage act. The law basically tossed the issue to the states, a federal cope-out if you will. As I saw events, most states didn't want to deal with it so they let things float along, inviting the challenge on the legal issue. The issue got murky because marriage in the cultural sense isn't just about living together, its about approval, approval of the union from your family, friends and the community at large. And that's where the opposition came from. Intellectually, same-sex marriage doesn't impact our concept of marriage any more than the high failure rate in the number of divorce, or its track record with abusive marriages. But emotionally, it was asking for approval and that's where people dug in their heels.

I agree with Patrick. Discrimination is discrimination. And change comes from active participation not passive hopefulness. That equal protection clause was in the constitution for nearly a hundred years during which we had Jim Crow and 'Separate, but equal', it took active participation to get the Civil Rights Act and the others that gave it teeth passed.

The question that looms know is whether a same sex marriage from one state is recognized by another. That may involve the Federal Circuit, so you haven't heard the end of that one.

The future of the Democrats. I would worry less about who to run in '06 and '08 and focus on how are you going to pay for it. With these defeats campaign contributions are going to be very sparse. It could be a good opportunity in the 'silver lining' sense, if the Dems find a way to run a campaign with fewer dollars and cleaner from the taint of big money, they might have a good place to start rebuilding.

Later everyone
Taleweaver
Saturday, November 6, 2004 02:41:46 AM
IP: 209.179.168.52

Or, more eloquently put, an exerpt from my friend's lj:

"umm... anyone else think it's silly to choose a president based on moral values, when that president is getting people killed, building nuclear bombs, destroying the envoronment, hiring criminals, outsourcing all our jobs, denying basic human rights, and giving iraqi contracts to his friends? not to mention that he's a homophobic meglomaniac drunk with no plans to help anyone domesticly except the top 1%. why o we need another 1000+ a year more nuclear bombs in a world that can alread destroy itself hundreds of times over with the nukes we have now? ... rah... that was a fun rant.... apparently all that is trumped because rednecks dont want gay people to have a simple civil union. i cant wait to tell the soldiers dieing in iraq that america is behind them 50%.... or less.... y'know i bet that if you polled republicans, they would say that they voted for him because of the moral issues (abortion and gay marraige) or they just didnt want a democrat. niether of those have anything to do with the war in iraq... i think there's only a brainwashed 15 or 20 percent that think it's a good idea to stay there. in reality, there's nothing more we can do. mostly because they hate us so much. some other country or coalition of countries could fix them up and get a government going. but anythign US backed is gonna be blown to bits over and over again."

Dezi
Saturday, November 6, 2004 02:18:40 AM
IP: 68.57.196.146

Hear hear!, brother Greg!

Especially on the churches. I'm so disgusted with Indiana's holier than thou approach to everything, and then the total flip the bird attitude towared real life. They wear their religion on their sleeve and then use it to validate all benificial points, and to elevate themselves from all of us "heathens".
Its that kinda bull that makes me fear them more than them thar terrists an furners!
Dezi
Saturday, November 6, 2004 02:13:21 AM
IP: 68.57.196.146

Evil typo...

"I believe that they are the most evil regime since the collapse of the Soviet Union, and that the House of Saud should NOT be allowed to remain in power."
Greg Bishansky
Saturday, November 6, 2004 01:33:43 AM
IP: 162.83.205.235

Well, I will say this.

It is time for Churches across the country to lose their tax exempt priveledges. If they want to play in the political arena and dictate to us, let them pay the price of admission like the rest of us.

As George Carlin said, if you just tax the Roman Catholic Church on their property, you could save Social Security.

And finally, to everyone who supports the war in Iraq. Why don't you just enlist? If you believe in it so much even now that we know there was no involvement with 9/11, no link to al Qaeda, no WMDs, you should be willing to enlist, go over there and fight the good fight.

I think we should invade Saudi Arabia. The royals have ties to al Qaeda, they funnel millions of dollars to them, they fund suicide bombers in Israel. They teach their people hatred and fear of Jews and America. They have public beheadings and are one of the world's biggest human rights violators. They were involved with 9/11... Osama is a Saudi. Most of the 9/11 hijackers were Saudis, most of al Qaeda's leadership is Saudi. Osama bin Laden is a hero to the Saudi people.

And I would enlist to fight a war against Saudi Arabia... I believe that they are the most evil regime since the collapse of the Soviet Union, and that the House of Saud should be allowed to remain in power. I'm willing to put my money where my mouth is for what I believe in.

DPH, some time in the military fighting for something you believe in would be the best thing you could do. YOu may even get a desk job. Head on down to your local recruitment office and enlist. Prove you believe in the Iraq War.
Greg Bishansky
Saturday, November 6, 2004 01:30:35 AM
IP: 162.83.205.235

Aaron> "Death due of medical misadventure is among the top ten causes of death in America, and all the trial lawyers in the world don't have any effect on the fact that doctors, by and large, are arrogant, lazy, and unwilling to admit when they don't know what they're doing..."

Including me, I presume?
Whitbourne
Saturday, November 6, 2004 12:14:28 AM
IP: 156.34.49.157

Why is it off-base to compare present-day discrimation against homosexuals to past discrimation against blacks? Discrimination is discrimation, isn't it?

A conservative interpretation of the Bible also says that the earth is only about 4,000 years old, slavery is okay, and we shouldn't eat pork. It's always been pretty clear to me that the Christian Right picks and chooses from the Old Testament to suit their agenda. And in this case that's probably because the New Testament doesn't say a single thing about homosexuality.

And now I shall digress, and take my political rants to my Livejournal.

Thank you, everyone, for the discourse.
Patrick
Friday, November 5, 2004 10:52:18 PM
IP: 68.170.199.45

Patrick - The Christian right is ultimately afraid that if they stick to the conservative interpretion of the Bible (which spells out homosexuality as a sin) and preach that way, they will be arrested for hate-speech.
DPH
AR, USA
Friday, November 5, 2004 10:01:01 PM
IP: 67.14.195.36

Patrick - If you're trying to compare civil rights for blacks to legality of homosexual marriage, you're way off base.
DPH
AR, USA
Friday, November 5, 2004 09:57:48 PM
IP: 67.14.195.36

If itt will happen "in time," is the solution just to sit on our keesters and wait? Or is the solution for people to continue pushing for the tolerance of government and law that the Constitution is supposed to guarantee, even if there are still people out there who won't personally accept it? Look at the civil rights movement. A lot of people used to get the heebie-jeebies about sharing their lunch counter or their school with someone whose skin was darker than theirs. Heck, some people still do. But if MLK and Malcolm X and all the rest had just decided to wait for society to evolve at its own pace, I bet in some parts of this country we'd still be waiting for those "whites only" signs to disappear.

Social change happens because people make it happen, whether through grass roots effort or legal means. The point is how fast do we want it to happen? Most gay people that I know aren't content to wait a couple more decades to be treated with the same dignity and respect as everyone else. And why should they be? If it were me, I sure wouldn't.
Patrick
Friday, November 5, 2004 08:48:57 PM
IP: 68.170.199.45

Patrick > No, I'm not missing the point. I understand you think that the 14th ammendment covers all. But what this issue is really about is what do Americans, all Americans, not just the ones who live in urban centers or are under 40 think. I live in the heart of the Bible belt. Consequently, I know a whole lot of people who's views are not mine. It boils down to that old saw about enforcing tolerance. You can't. People are either ready to accept change or their not. And when they're not you can't make them. The sad fact of it is something like 80 percent of the American population gets the heebee jeebies whenever you talk about a gay couple getting hitched.

But times are changing. A lesbian couple of my acquaintence recently remarked that there was no way 20 years ago they could live openly as a couple in Tennessee. Society evolves.

To get out the history book and site an example I think will bear out as parallel in a couple more decades in 1976 there was a great push to pass the Equal Rights Amendment. Back in those dark days, women felt they had to have special protection under the constitution in order to be equal citizens. It didn't pass.

So what happened? Women quit burning their bras and went about the business of causing social change by getting educations, staying in the work force and moving up the career ladder and so forth. Now, except for certain jobs in the military, we can pretty much do whatever we bloody well please, be it stay home with the kids or run a corporation. Change happens when people are willing to work with the system.

Gay marriage will happen. It will be accepted by the majority... in time.
kathy
Friday, November 5, 2004 06:55:53 PM
IP: 66.82.9.15

Adding one more comment. It's only become a church issue because the churches have chosen to step out there and claim a moral high ground that they feel should permit them to legislate their beliefs onto everyone else. Never mind that it was this same mindset of "the Bible says so" that not too long ago in our history made women second class citizens, pushed the Native Americans onto reservations, and justified slavery, segregation, and Jim Crow.

:: gets off the soapbox and exits ::
Patrick
Friday, November 5, 2004 06:08:00 PM
IP: 68.170.199.45

Kathy > I think you're missing the point. Let the churches bestow their sacraments on whomever they choose. This issue isn't about churches. It's about government. Why should John and David have to hire a lawyer and have all that legal paperwork drawn up in an attempt to protect their interests as a couple when Tom and Sue can simply go to a justice of the peace, have a civil ceremony, and automatically receive all the same protections? In fact, they receive stronger protections... because what any good lawyer can put together for John and David, an even better lawyer can undo after John dies and his family decides that they should get his money, not David. That is where the root of this issue lies. Equal protection under civil law.
Patrick
Friday, November 5, 2004 05:58:59 PM
IP: 68.170.199.45

Sorry, Aaron. Been there, done that. Nearly died myself some years ago, because in the bad old days of HMOs I couldn't get to treatment soon enough. But there are reasons why trial lawyers are regarded as ambulance chasers. Doctors are human people and occasionally they screw up. When they do then the people who get hurt should be entitled to fair, repeat fair, compensation. But injury by a doctor isn't an excuse to haul in a lotto-sized jackpot.
kathy
Friday, November 5, 2004 05:33:19 PM
IP: 66.82.9.67

Hey Kathy, when your doctor amputates the wrong leg, or forgets a couple of metal instruments inside you after surgery, or spends a year insisting your kid is vomiting feces because he's just refusing to take a dump, not that there's something physically wrong with him, and you can't sue for more than chump change, don't come cryin' to me.

I'm so sick and tired of hearing about these poor, put-upon doctors who're being hounded out of existence by trial lawyers. Maybe, if they'd quit taking three days a week off to play golf, quit prescribing drugs based on which pharmacutical company sent them on an all-expenses paid junket to the Bahamas, and started doing something to actually cure diseases instead of treat symptoms, they wouldn't be so bad off.

Death due of medical misadventure is among the top ten causes of death in America, and all the trial lawyers in the world don't have any effect on the fact that doctors, by and large, are arrogant, lazy, and unwilling to admit when they don't know what they're doing...

Kind of like a certain chief executive we're all stuck with for another four years...
Aaron
Friday, November 5, 2004 05:28:55 PM
IP: 66.139.49.253

Hey! Wait! That was a post from Green Baron! Hey sweetie, I was thinking about you today. I must say I'm somewhat shocked by your view about John Edwards. The most liberal (excuse me, progressive) person I know, a public health doctor, actually voted Republican this year because she was so distressed over the effect John Edwards personally had on health care in the Southeast. But to each his own.
Anyway, glad to see you're doing well.
kathy
Friday, November 5, 2004 03:42:37 PM
IP: 66.82.9.71

Gay marriage > My personal opinion is any couple straight or gay that has the wherewithal to put the work into a relationship is entitled to get married. However, having said that, you have to remember that marriage is actually governed by two different institutions: civil law and religious covenant. Contractually right now *any* couple be it gay, straight or platonic roommates can form a civil union (although that's not what it's called) by either going to a lawyer or the local stationary store, or Amazon and filling out the proper forms and agreements and having them witnessed, notarized and filed per the laws of their state. Said forms include joint tenantcy on their residence, medical power of attorney, a will and so forth.

Actually any couple who live together whether or not they're married or just cohabitating should do this anyway just as good finanacial housekeeping.

What's causing the rub is the religious aspect of marriage. Marriage is a sacrement in most religions. Sacrements aren't supposed to be tinkered with, they're sacred and inviolate.

So what's the solution? Pragmatism says just call it something else. There are plenty of lawyers willing to do domestic arrangement paperwork and plenty of non denominational/ alternative churches willing to do blessings or holy union ceremonies. It's much faster than waiting for 2000 or more year old institutions and their followers to change their dogma.
ymmv, but that's my take.
kathy
Friday, November 5, 2004 02:58:47 PM
IP: 66.82.9.71

Patrick - I'm not saying it's about pay, but I found the importance of poll workers . . comparable to security guards. You get what you pay for. If you want to have unquestionable elections, increase money training and increase pay to attract higher quality people. For a 12 hour day, I'd say something closer to $96 is a good idea because truthfully it's at least a 13 hour day.
DPH
AR, USA
Friday, November 5, 2004 01:01:20 PM
IP: 161.31.67.128

Whit > Kudos for Saskatchewan.

We'll get things straightened out here in the States. It's just going to take some time and a lot of lawyers... just like it always does whenever the states do something that violates the U.S. Constitution.

* * * * *

AMENDMENT XIV
Passed by Congress June 13, 1866. Ratified July 9, 1868.

Section 1.
All persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the State wherein they reside. No State shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States; nor shall any State deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws.

* * * * *

That equal protection clause gets 'em every time.
Patrick
Friday, November 5, 2004 12:41:27 PM
IP: 66.93.14.153

"...where can you find Kenya?...Only in in Mordoooor!
Come to Mordor, we got Kenyaaaa...."
Lynati "Forget about Gondor" Kshudra
];)
Friday, November 5, 2004 12:36:28 PM
IP: 172.129.160.79

Though ten states voted on Tuesday to ban same-sex marriage, here in Canada the province of Saskatchewan has just announced that same-sex marriages will be recognized in the province. This is the seventh Canadian jusridiction to do so, following Ontario, Quebec, British Columbia, the Yukon, Manitoba, and Nova Scotia.
Whitbourne
Friday, November 5, 2004 12:21:21 PM
IP: 129.173.137.84

Matt----Da--mon!!!
Green Baron
Friday, November 5, 2004 10:14:41 AM
IP: 221.163.157.82

GB: Dirka dirka dirka muhamed ali!
Dezi
Friday, November 5, 2004 10:04:16 AM
IP: 68.57.196.146

Side note: Dezi> Don't knock Wyoming. My father has family there including a distant cousin who owns a ranch in Cody :p


Green Baron - [greenbaron@hotmail.com]
Camp Humphreys, Korea
Friday, November 5, 2004 09:19:47 AM
IP: 221.163.157.82

Greetings and good cheer.

Sorry for the absence, but the military has been pressing on me..thanskfully I have 65 days left and in 5 days days I will be improving US-Canadian relationships by being with my beloved Newfie :)

On the otehr hand this will lead to comments about how Newfoundland is positioned to take it in the rear from Canada geographically, though :)

Whitbourne> Well, I'm gald you're not going to waste yoru energy on Bush. I'd blame the folsk who thought Kerry was so electable. I believe that John Edwards would have wiped the floor with Bush.

I also happen to agree with you on the subsidies and trariffs and ban on beef 100%, but it is just one fo those rare things.

I want America to abolish all tarrifs, subsidies, and any and every use of protectionism, and I find Demcoracy is at fault for half thsi bullshit, along with teh fact that politicians are too chickenshit to fix social security.

As for Canada's systme fo government. I love visiting Canada and I enjoy teh places I've been too. I look forwad to spending 10 days in Toronto. I don't agree with much of Canada's social system, but that jsut menas Karen's mom will not convince me to move there, unless I can seriously milk the system, whiel living in Alberta :)

I do however support public transportation (maybe even more than you do). It is the only thing I'd have quasi-socialist leanings on.

My take on Elections> Well, I was defending and ensuring the right to vote while doing a field exercise. I am gald this is my last one to do.

I vote for Michale Badnarik the Libertarian, and I hoped he would hurt Bush and punish the Republicans for turning into a bunch of free-spending, big government liberals, but I guess it would help if say Edwards was the Democratic nominee. Of course Gore could have endorsed Bush. His endorsement killed Howard Dean's momentum and could have really hurt Bush :)

I was hoping for a narrow victory for Kerry due to Badnarik, so it would give the GOP a message about returning to small government.

But in a sense Bush did lose....he narrowly defeated John Kerry, and that is not something to be proud of. Reagan or even Nixon annhiliated their re-electin challengers, and Kerry was not a Clinton (Edwards was Clinton without the hard-on). This is historic as a sitting presidnet has not been narrowly re-elected since maybe Truman (though his victory freed him from the influence of a deranged and twisted subhuman like Henry Wallace, or Strom Thurmond who continued to oppose intergartion except in regards to his sex life). If Bush was any good, he'd have hit Kerry so hard taht Kerry would just resign form the Senate in shame. If a respectable centrist Southerner was nominated by the Demmies, Bush would be gone....remeber that in 2008...there are some Democrat Governors in the midwest and South who can win. Of course the GOP should pick someone better than Cheney...as they may lack a botox-faced gold digger with a scary wife to run against,a nd Cheney's heart isn't in it.

Now, accoridng to some rumors, Rumsfeld, Powell, Rice, Ashcroft, and Mineta may be resigning. This may not be true, though. I think replacing Ashcroft with Rudy Guiliani is a very smart move, but this is Bush we're talking about.

Dezi> I hear a lot about Obama and he did a lot better than Kerry in Illinois, but I'll wait to see how he votes before I form an opinion. Also, I'd rather he become Governor of Illinois before running for President as Governors tend to have executive experience, which is a plus most of the time.

My own suggestion for a good Democratic nominee (excluding Edwards) would be Evan Bayh or Phil Bredesen of Tennessee.

Good nes form elections> Congratulations to David Vitter of Metarie, Louisiana on being the firts Republcian ever elected to the US Senate from the corrupt and backwards state of Louisiana. He is also a graduate of De La Salle High School (class of 75), so as a fellow Cavalier, I am very happy.

As for January, my HS will ahve 1 US Senator, 1 Congressman, 2 State Senators, and a State Representative, along with a few judges.

Also, Tom Daschle got dashed in South Dakota as John Thune edged him out. I imagine Tom Daschle will respond by crying and going home to his mommy as he is a weenie.

Taleweaver> I think you have the best response to the election aftermath. One of my favorite bloggers, Michael Totten has a similar one:

http://www.michaeltotten.com/archives/000588.html

And I am an urban conservative, having elements of the red and blue sectors of America. While I do not share the polictial philosophy in NYC or Toronto, I look forward to seeing them this winter afetr I return from Korea....65 days woohoo.

I also look forward to visiting Vancouver and SanFranciscio at a future date..sadly I won't be flying through Seattle when I leave, so I won't see Lain and Gunjack this time around, but I will be there another time. I also look forward to visiting Las Vegas next summer. Politically I am to the right of all these palces, but ony a principled fanatic or some deranged ideological wonk would let that affect their enjoyment of them.

More good news> Aafat may be dead...some say the bastard is still alive, but then again some claim Jimmy Carter's brain functions. I say good riddance to Arafat. He was a bigger threat to the Palestinains than Sharon, and he made billions backing a cause and struggle while doing nothing to help the people he championed. May hsi 72 virgins be even uglier than him.

Movies to see> Team America is a great satire and all I have to say is: Dirka Dirka Dirka!!!

I recommend seeing it, though I wished they picked on Bush or Kerry, but their portarayal of Michael Moore was great as well as that of Kim Jong Il, plus I loved how he dispatched Hans "Swedish Chef" Blix :)


Green Baron - [greenbaron@hotmail.com]
Camp Humphreys, Korea
Friday, November 5, 2004 09:17:15 AM
IP: 221.163.157.82

Most people who sign up to work the polls do so out of a sense of civil responsibility, not because they're looking for a big payday. $75 for the day? That's better pay than jury duty, and at the end of the day you won't be locked up in a hotel with eleven strangers.

32 days left until the spell is broken and they live again! Gargoyles Season One comes to DVD on December 7, 2004!
Patrick
Friday, November 5, 2004 06:47:29 AM
IP: 68.170.199.45

Not bad, exactly 5000 characters in my previous post.
DPH
AR, USA
Friday, November 5, 2004 12:45:44 AM
IP: 67.14.195.27

Despite what you hear, this election was NOT about morality: marriage amendments that excluded homosexual marriage were voted on in ONLY 10 states.

BTW, has anyone heard anything about so-called 'voter disenfranchisement' that the democrats predicted?

Moving onward to another area, do you realize that most poll workers are paid just above minimum wage? In Arkansas, poll workers are paid $75 for that one 12 hour day. If they are just paid for those 12 hours in which voters could vote, that amounts to **$6.00 per hour**. And we trust our elections to these underpaid people? I require my poll workers to get to the poll at least 45 minutes to 1 hour BEFORE the polls open to finish getting everything ready. Assuming the polls close at 7:30pm, there's at least 30 more minutes worth of work to do: 1st, verifying the count: the total number of people who voted on the machines has got to equal the total number of people who signed in. This process usually takes 10-15 minutes, assuming the numbers add up right away. Next, comes the process of getting the results from the machines and sealing them up properly. This takes ~10 minutes per machine in my precint. Then add about 5-10 minutes for tabulating results/cleaning things up. So that amounts to at least 13 hours of work: To keep things above minimum wage: workers can only work 14 hours, 17 minutes, and 9 seconds.

Speaking of that, time to unveil a letter to the editor I had typed up prior to Tuesday's election, describing what went on ahead of time.

**WARNING: LONG LETTER**

Many of you are concerned about election fraud, and I, being a poll worker, would like to share with you my perspective on the elections.

Each election cycle, before the primary election, there is one training class for the poll workers. This class lasts between one and two hours and participants leave with a packet of information about the election. This year, however, was different; there was a second training class. For the well seasoned poll worker, attendance in this class is enough. For the poll workers who have not been through too many election cycles, studying the packet is a must. Each voting precint has somebody in charge; most of the time, this person is a well seasoned poll worker.

By the time the polls open, the poll workers will have spent between 30 minutes and one hour getting the precint ready for the voters. This includes setting the machines up, arranging the placement of voting machines and the sign-in area to meet election law. The aforementioned packet comes up with a checklist of things to do before, during, and after the election.

These poll workers will spend 12 hours - 7:30am to 7:30pm - helping people vote. The majority of poll workers, even though they have people whom they want to see win the election, want an honest election, at least in this county from what I have observed in the training class. If your name is not in the list of registered voters for the precint or you have incorrect information listed with your name, then it is not the result of poll workers trying to keep you from voting. Part of training for the poll workers include what to do when somebody shows up whose name is not on the list of registered voters; the answer to dealing with situation is not automatically sending the person away. To my understanding, voter fraud results in fines and/or jail time. If you have problems with voter registeration or incorrect information listed with your name on the voter list, do not blame the poll workers.

There is a reliable method for ensuring that you have registered to vote correctly without having to rely on an organization to do the work for you. Take responsibility and register yourself to vote ahead of time. Find out where you are supposed to register to vote, get the appropriate forms, fill them out, and turn them the same day. If you have a question about your name being on the list of registered voters, before the election, make a call or visit to find out for sure. If you move, do not forget to update your address on the list of registered voters. This will save you time on the day of the elections because if your address has changed, the poll workers will have to call verify where you are supposed to vote.

At the end of the day, after everybody has finished voting, the poll workers tally the results. Since results are computed by machine, this makes the process easily verifiable about poll workers reporting the correct results. Also, the poll workers are supposed to make sure the number of people who signed in to vote is the same as the number of people who voted. If there is a difference between these two numbers, the problem has to be resolved before election results can be turned in. That's it. Once the results are tabulated and posted, the poll workers can head home and usually the person in charge personally delivers the result to the courthouse to be counted.

**END LONG LETTER**

Not bad: Vic Snyder got 157,393 votes and Marvin Parks got 113,948 votes. Not bad, my candidate got 42% of the vote.
DPH
AR, USA
Friday, November 5, 2004 12:44:46 AM
IP: 67.14.195.27

Damn, forgot the color.

GSide: Hilarious. So it's true then, no one gives a fuck about Wyoming!
Dezi
Friday, November 5, 2004 12:11:51 AM
IP: 68.57.196.146

NOOOOOO! The Kenya toon is back!!! I thought I had rid my brain of that song!! ....If Obama runs for prez, that is soo his campaign song...My Kenyan pal agrees. She says that at the DNC, a bunch of govt officials from her country showed up to show support for him. They are all so proud. Go Obama!
Dezi
Friday, November 5, 2004 12:09:08 AM
IP: 68.57.196.146

Hey, here's a thought. Supposing the draft even had a chance of getting reinstated. Why would anyone want to go to Canada? Kenya sounds more appealing. Check out the link on my name for more info.

And by the way: I know there are no tigers in Africa. But it's still a good song.
Harvester of Eyes - [Minstrel75@aol.com]
Fredericksburg, VA, USA
Thursday, November 4, 2004 11:36:44 PM
IP: 69.174.23.52

DPH> <<it looked like Bush won a much larger geographic area than Kerry did>>: I love this map: http://www.nytimes.com/packages/html/politics/2004_ELECTIONRESULTS_GRAPHIC/
Click the button and watch the rockies shrink.

Kathy> <<Demon rum can be both bought and served in Kingston, TN>>: I prefer angel rum. All the taste, no hangover.

Patrick> <<Or would that not be PC?>>: It wouldn't be PC.

Na zdorov'ya.
Gside - [gside@comcast.net]
Fair Haven, NJ
Thursday, November 4, 2004 11:31:57 PM
IP: 68.83.187.89

Hi yall
i did not know that gargoyles was still on tv and i get inspired very easily so im on a gargoyle high and i found a couple of clas but none of them are running anyore. so i was wondering if any of ya whould know of a few clans on the internet and if anyone would like to help fill me in on all these sagas that have come out pls
Rasputtin - [vadorbell@yahoo.com]
Thursday, November 4, 2004 11:28:51 PM
IP: 68.127.38.60

Harvester of Eyes: I don't watch TV anymore. I was too busy to catch more than an occasional ep of CSI monday nights when I was still in college, and I only got in that channel and the home shopping network. I was at my parent's house for a month and a half after school and the TV was broken; Now I catch John Stewart at the other house sometimes, but that's it. If I feel the need to have background entertainment on when I work, I throw on a dvd or a vid or music.

Hey Gunjack, how's the great white north? and please tell lain I just found the postcard I wrote her while in the Dallas/Ft.Worth layover on my way to the LA Gathering. At this rate I should have the letter I owe her by the time Weisman gets to the 2004-era AG questions.
Lynati
Thursday, November 4, 2004 11:13:19 PM
IP: 172.152.222.219

You restore the balance of power by electing Democrats in two years when the next round of congressional elections happen. Honestly... I'm baffled why some people think this is the end of the world and things will never change.

I don't for a second believe that a lot of people want to run off to Canada, either. I think a lot of poeple are grandstanding by _saying_ that they do, but in the end I think it's all just hot air. In fact, I'll help buy a one-way bus ticket for the first person who says that who actually packs a bag and heads north. Be prepared for a long wait to get in, though. The immigration process takes about a year, so be sure to pack some snacks.
Patrick
Thursday, November 4, 2004 07:27:08 PM
IP: 68.170.199.45

I have a question. Lots of people seem to be unhappy about the outcome of the elections, including some people that voted for Bush. They think the loss of Democratic seats in the houses will upset the balance of power enough to be cause for worry.

So I'm curious; what are the options or recommendations for those people who still want to be politically active? How does one restore the balance of power? How do we avoid the situation of the last election, where Americans had to choose between the lesser of two evils instead of choosing between decent, capable men?

I think a lot of people want to run off to Canada or wherever because they're feeling helpless to change the current situation or the future.
Mecord's Cat - [piseag2048@lycos.com]
Thursday, November 4, 2004 06:43:32 PM
IP: 67.40.106.231

I was watching C-SPAN when they held the vote on H.R. 163.

Yea: 2
Nay: 402
No vote: 28

As I recall, even the Democrats who had proposed it voted against it.
Patrick
Thursday, November 4, 2004 05:30:27 PM
IP: 66.93.14.153

HofE > Yep. Charles Rangel D-NY and John Conyers D-Michigan plus a couple of others introduced the Universal Service Act of 2003. If passed it would have meant MANDATORY national service for all Americans male and female age 18-26. Click for a copy of the bill H.R. 163.
Their point was that fewer people would be gung ho to go to war if rich kids had to serve too. It was defeated earlier this year by a rather lopsided margin.
kathy
Thursday, November 4, 2004 03:19:10 PM
IP: 66.82.9.44

HofE > Yep. Charles Rangel D-NY and John Conyers D-Michigan plus a couple of others introduced the Universal Service Act of 2003. If passed it would have meant MANDATORY national service for all Americans male and female age 18-26. Click for a copy of the bill H.R. 163.
There point was that fewer people would be gung ho to go to war if rich kids had to serve too. It was defeated earlier this year by a rather lopsided margin.
kathy
Thursday, November 4, 2004 03:18:59 PM
IP: 66.82.9.44

According to my dad, a Bush supporter, a few democratic senators were the ones who first suggested reinstating the draft. Does anyone know if that's true? Honestly, it wouldn't surprise me. The rumor that there's a conservative bias in the media is shite, anyway.
Harvester of Eyes - [Minstrel75@aol.com]
Fredericksburg, VA, USA
Thursday, November 4, 2004 01:26:50 PM
IP: 69.174.23.52

Taleweaver > I'm the one who pointed out that it takes an act of Congress, but the redeployment thing wasn't my idea. I was simply repeating what Bush said during the campaign when people tried to drill him with the "But how will we get the troops if not by a draft?" paranoia.

Kathy > I registered when I turned 18, and since I just turned 30 I guess I can burn the little confirmation postcard now if I can remember where it is.

FYI to anyone out there who should be registered but isn't. If you want any sort of federal financial aid for college, you have to be registered. Now... shall we dare talk about why, in this age where all men and women are equal, that young WOMEN age 18 to 30 don't also have to register? Or would that not be PC?
Patrick
Thursday, November 4, 2004 01:01:14 PM
IP: 66.93.14.153

Patrick> These are different issues. Both the cattle issue and the softwod lumber issue are based on Canadian imports to America, not taxation on American goods in Canada.
The live import of Canadian cattle has been banned for over a year and a half now, since one animal was found to have contracted BSE. Since then, the American Dept. of Agriculture claims that it isn't "safe", even though both Canadian and independent testing of Canada's BSE safeguard system is not only effective, but that the Canadian system is actually more thorough and accurate than the American system. American cattle ranchers, however, have successfully lobbied Washington to keep the border closed; the Canadian cattle industry has lost billions of dollars and thousands of cattle farms have either closed or are on the verge.
Softwood lumber imports have faced egregious tariffs upon import to the US, because the U.S. forestry industry has claimed that we're "dumping" and engaging in "unfair subsidies". Both NAFTA and the World Trade Organization have examined these claims, and both have found them to be completely baseless and not grounded, in any sense, on facts. However, the tariffs are still there, again because of lobbying, and again, the Canadian industry is hurting, badly. Bush did nothing on these issues during his first term, and that's why a second term, for us, just means more of the same inaction and dithering and pandering to lobbyists will at the same time offering lines about the glories of free trade and cross-border enterprise.

As for sales taxes, I'll plead ignorance to how this affects American exporters, because as far as I know, our Goods and Services Tax - the only federal sales tax - is refundable to non-Canadian citizens so long as they provide receipts to Canada Customs. Provincial Sales Tax is just that, provincial, and so what we do in Nova Scotia is completely different from what Manitoba or British Columbia do.
If you mean the taxes that American companies face for having offices here, again, I don't know much about those. But I do think that if you want to do business in another country, then you have to abide by that nation's tax codes, with the NAFTA proviso that it doesn't put you at a disadvantage compared to that country's domestic industries. American companies wouldn;t pay any more tax than Canadian companies do, and they even have the potential to have federal tax refunded, as far as I know.

Philosophically, here in Canada there is much more of a social compact when it comes to taxes. America seems to have more fo a focus on individual fortune, while Canada believes more in collective agreements. There are advantages and disadvantages either way, but our taxes provide all provinces and territories with relatively equal services regardless of economic chance, and give all citizens the same level of human resources such as health care, public education, defence, social security, and transport, all to a relatively decent (though improvable) standard, and all to a pretty-much universal degree. Some people consider it burdonsome, but Canadians, as a whole, realize that social programs and services cost money, and that relatively higher taxes are a fair price to pay. That's national philosophy, but I don't think that impacts American business to the extent that unfair softwood lumber tariffs and agricultural protectionism are hurting us.

(pants) I don't think I've ever written so much about economics at one time before.

Whitbourne
Thursday, November 4, 2004 12:35:25 PM
IP: 156.34.89.50

Demon Rum? Oh, I'm there.

I'm still in the mixed stages of anger, denial and acceptance. I don't know how bargaining can work here. I'm disappointed that it didn't go the other way, but not all that bitter. And running to Canada? Please, the US isn't getting rid of me that easily.

I hear a lot of talk about reconcilliation, but I scratch my head trying to figure out how that supposed to work. Usually, reconcilling is about acknowledging and addressing the others issues and concerns; seeing where they come from. What made this campaign so venomous was the polarization. There is very little middle ground and even few wishing to seek it. If reconcilliation is code for "I'm right, you're wrong, so shut it!", then disaster looms for the country. But how do you make that bridge when part of your campaign is you can do no wrong.

I'm not worried about the draft. As Mecord and Kathy pointed out that takes an act of Congress. And further, it would be an admission of weakness and Bush would never go for that. Patrick's idea has one flaw. We've been decommisioning and downsizing foreign bases since the fall of the USSR back in the 90's. Enlistment is up so it isn't a near-term problem, but it will be in the long-term if insurrgents remain a fixture on the Iraqi landscape.

I suspect things will run hot for the next week, but keep in mind a couple of things. First, don't assume anyone, regardless of who they voted for, is stupid or lacking in the intelligence to make an informed decision. (This comes from marrying someone with opposing political views) Second, if you're going to attack, attack the position not the person. This was the lowest point of the campaign in my opinion. The broad assumption that because someone is liberal they are a coward and only conservatives have what it takes to win a fight. I have not yet heard of a greater untruth. Fianlly, only the campaigns ended on election day, not the political process. I'm pleased as punch we had such a high turnout. I hope we'll have the same fortune in the midterm elections and 2008. But keep the debate going. I know in a CR that's like tell people to continue breathing (Its good for you!).

Taleweaver
Thursday, November 4, 2004 10:49:59 AM
IP: 209.179.168.53

Just out of curiosity, you do know that we've had selective service registration for men between 18 and 30 since 1979, right? Signed into law by Jimmy Carter. How many of you eligible fellas both filled out your paperwork and have been keeping it current?

There won't be a draft. That was one of the more egregious scare tactics used by the DNC to convince young voters to lean Kerry. The most likely course of action if they needed additional troops is reallocation of currently eligible manpower including the reclassification of where women can serve so that they can move mixed support units closer to hot zones.

It really is a non-issue.

On a completely unrelated note... The people have spoken! Demon rum can be both bought and served in Kingston, TN!
kathy
Thursday, November 4, 2004 08:00:45 AM
IP: 66.82.9.82

That last post was mine... ugh. Need coffee.
Patrick
Thursday, November 4, 2004 06:50:45 AM
IP: 68.170.199.45

Whit > The taxes and duties that make it a pain to do business across the border work both ways. How about you Canadians do something about changing your own overly burdonsome system before demanding that we change ours to benefit you? Canada's sales tax rates, for example, are nearly double those in the U.S.

Bush says we can find the additional military manpower we need by reallocating our forces. The Cold War is over. We don't need to have thousands of troops stationed at bases in Europe and Japan.

33 days left until the spell is broken and they live again! Gargoyles Season One comes to DVD on December 7, 2004!
Anonymous
Thursday, November 4, 2004 06:50:13 AM
IP: 68.170.199.45

Things are calming down, anyway. I went through my denial, anger, guilt and bargaining phases - nothing left to do now but accept it, and start working to minimize the damage that Bush' re-election will do here in Canada. Our big thing is going to be trying to extricate our economy from yours; it's unhealthy for us to be so economically dependent on your economy, especially when it's so uncertain and when there are so many unfair trade rules that are being used against our exports.

Re: draft - yes, it is premature and unpopular. And yet (writers love those words) the US military is stretched pretty thin as it is, and if anything else were to happen (pre-emptive strike against Iran, say) then the soldiers have to come from somewhere. Not to be blunt, but in most other countries around the world, as long as Bush is in power, sending troops to help the Americans is pretty near political suicide unless it's proven that the war is necessary - and after the WMD debacle, the standard of proof is a lot higher, and it's going to be hard for people to trust any evidence that the Bush administration presents. If foreign soldiers won't help, then any extra forces will have to come domestically - and they gotta come from somewhere. That's all I'm sayin'.

There's a vaguely bemused sense up here at just how truly right-wing American society is, I suppose. Even the Democrats; it's almost funny to call them left-wing, because they're to the right of our right-wing party up here, the Conservatives. Our Liberal party, which has been in power for much of the last hundred years, is ideologically fluid, shifting right or left as need be, but the American equivalents would probably be a hundred years of Ralph Nader in power, with anyone to the right of him viewed with suspicion.

Anyway, I'm not going to get bilious anymore. Of all the people on the planet worth fighting over, George W. Bush is pretty low on the list, somewhere beneath Milli Vanilli.
Whitbourne
Thursday, November 4, 2004 05:49:35 AM
IP: 142.177.35.69

DPH> Maybe they just don't believe in enforcing their own personal religious beliefs on people who do not share those beliefs. I believe that's what Kerry said. Don't know the other guy.

But it's moot now, since the race is over, and Kerry didn't win.
Greg Bishansky
Thursday, November 4, 2004 02:11:12 AM
IP: 162.83.205.235

DPH:<From the map, it looked like Bush won a much larger geographic area than Kerry did.> Yeah but how many people live in Wyoming versus Illinois? Same goes for N. and S. Dakota and probably Montana.

Screw running to Canada, learn some Spanish and head south!
Dezi
Thursday, November 4, 2004 01:50:32 AM
IP: 68.57.196.146

My state (Arkansas) elected both Republican Bush for President and Democrat Vic Synder for House of Representatives, even though both stand on opposite issues of the moral spectrum. An overwhelming majority of my state voted for a Marriage Amendment defining marriage as a union between a man and a woman. Yet, Vic Synder is against that. Go figure. He mentioned that his wife is reverend of a church, yet he supports partial birth abortion. Sorry, something does not add up.

As for as Kerry's religious 'faith', to my knowledge, a very large percentage of Christians believe that life begins at conception.

Patrick - < If you think the presidential campaign was fought dirty, it was nothing compared to some of the local races around here.> Hey, I feel the same way about a group outside Arkansas seriously funding a group to defeat a measure to extend term limits so that our state representatives and state senators can serve 12 years instead of the six years under our current term limits amendment. 6 years to gain experience when our legislature only meets once every 2 years for 60 days.

Gunjack - <Any wagers on the countdown to the draft?> As a practical reminder, President Bush has publically stated that he is against a draft. Furthermore, it takes an act of Congress to reinstate the draft. Should the draft be reinstated, the republican party will lose at least the two elections following that. Practical politics will keep a draft from being reinstated, barring a country declaring war against the US.

**looks over list to see if he wants to add anything**

Did I mention being awestruck by the turnout at 7:30am to vote?

Canada - I understand there is a memorial put in Canada in honor of an American draft dodger (avoding Vietnam). Is that true?

Mecord's cat - <withdrawing from Iraq now would be a mistake because it would leave the country in a worse state than we found it in, plus it would make the deaths of soldiers already lost in this war meaningless.> That's one of my biggest reasons for why I was against Kerry. His political base (the far left) wants America out of Iraq **yesterday**, regardless of consequences. My other reason is the so-called 'moral issues'.

Anybody notice the election map for which states voted which way for president: From the map, it looked like Bush won a much larger geographic area than Kerry did. Also, Bush primarily won the middle of the continental US while Kerry primarily won the states on the East and West Coast. Is either party becoming too regional?
DPH
AR, USA
Thursday, November 4, 2004 12:33:21 AM
IP: 67.14.195.23

Patrick: Yeah, that, too... I don't see where this draft hysteria thing keeps coming from.
Tharos
Thursday, November 4, 2004 12:21:18 AM
IP: 165.190.89.139

Greg > It seems to me there are reasons for why people voted Bush back in office even though they think the war in Iraq was a mistake. I don't lay claim to believing in any of these ideas, but here are some of the reasons I've heard:

- withdrawing from Iraq now would be a mistake because it would leave the country in a worse state than we found it in, plus it would make the deaths of soldiers already lost in this war meaningless.
- switching leaders in the middle of a war is not a good idea.
- Kerry never said what he'd do to change the situation America's in; he just said Bush sucked and that anybody else was a better alternative. People will almost always choose the death they know than the unknown.

That's all I can think of for now.
Mecord's Cat
Thursday, November 4, 2004 12:01:02 AM
IP: 67.40.106.231

According to the polls, most Americans view the war in Iraq as a mistake. But at the same time, most Americans voted to re-hire the guy who put us there.

It's official, most Americans are smoking crack! ;)
Greg Bishansky
Wednesday, November 3, 2004 11:34:42 PM
IP: 162.83.205.235

Patrick> <<Those people who complain endlessly about the incumbent yet throw away their vote>>: I doubt I will be complaining much of a political nature. Of course, that's mostly because of my own nature than any potential events.

Na zdorov'ya.
Gside - [gside@comcast.net]
Fair Haven, NJ
Wednesday, November 3, 2004 11:29:50 PM
IP: 68.83.187.89

Seems to me that Congress just voted down a draft bill by an overwhelming margin not more than about a month ago. I don't think very many of the people who are freaking out realize that it takes an act of Congress to institute a military draft. The President can't just declare one and it will be so.
Patrick
Wednesday, November 3, 2004 11:14:03 PM
IP: 68.170.199.45

Whitbourne and HoE: Although a lot of those make sense, the draft won't be reinstated. Public opinion on it is still far too negative, and we've already outlawed it once. Plus, we have a powerful military. Know why? Because it's volunteer-based, which allows for more training time to be spent on each soldier. If we had a draft, the military would be bigger, but most definately not better. It's much more effective the way it is. And if it ever IS reinstated, I'll be super-pissed.

...These are the things you learn from being good friends and rooming with a West Point transfer whose entire life and future plans revolve around the military. Those crazy Republicans. :)
Tharos
Wednesday, November 3, 2004 10:17:05 PM
IP: 165.190.89.139

Whitbourne: if the draft is reinstated, my brother plans to flee to Canada. Is that okay with you? He likes Rush, and he's housebroken.
Harvester of Eyes - [Minstrel75@aol.com]
Fredericksburg, VA, USA
Wednesday, November 3, 2004 09:08:16 PM
IP: 69.174.23.52

That's exactly what I mean. Anyone who's saying they'll "move to Canada" is saying they give up. That's a free ticket to allow Bush's agenda to pass without protest, and I think that's harmful. I'm saying "don't come here and expect us to have sympathy". We have a stake in this too, and we're counting on you to fix things, both now by helping to block the harmful aspects of the Bush/neo-con agenda, and in the midterm elections in 2006 and the next general election in 2008.

Kathy, I repect your opinion, and yeah, I do understand that what Canada thinks is not going to be the prime motivator for the typical American voter. That doesn't mean that we aren;t disappointed all the same, and that doesn't mean that we ought to just shrug and leave it be. Bush's environmental and economic policies affect us, simply because we share the same geographic space. The USA PATRIOT act has already been used to gather information on Canadian citizens who do not have anything to do with American policies, save for the fact that they do their banking or whatever with Canadian companies that happen to have subsidiaries in America. Bush's foreign policy affects us (the pressure for us to toe the US line is enormous enough as it is, and Bush's "you're with us or you're with the terrorists" mindset makes it that much harder to maintain a sovereign position without risking knee-jerk retaliation), Bush's domestic policies affect us (Internet pharmacies, protectionism blocking our softwood lumber and cattle markets), and that's not even mentioning the potential repurcussions of possible Bush policies. What if a draft is instituted? Where are all the dodgers going to go? And how could we expect that the gung-ho guns wouldn't decide to retaliate against us if we let them in? Same thing is Roe v. Wade is overturned or if other social-consevravtive policies are instituted - we're going to get the influx of people rushing to escape them.

So yeah, it does affect us pretty profoundly, and that's why the bile is running just a little bit thicker up here than usual.
Whitbourne
Wednesday, November 3, 2004 07:28:44 PM
IP: 142.177.156.37

Dezi > Ohio was called for Bush because his margin grew so great, even if every single provisional and absentee ballot contained a vote for Kerry (which is unlikely given the near 50/50 split in the rest of the vote), it still wouldn't be enough votes to put his total over Bush's. Yes, those votes will still be counted. There's just no mathematical way Kerry can win even after they're added in.

Now that Bush has his victory, I hope this means we'll soon see some decisive action against these terrorists in Iraq who continue to slice the heads off anyone they can get their hands on. No one has to worry now about the body count affecting the vote if the Marines are sent in.
Patrick
Cleveland, Ohio
Wednesday, November 3, 2004 06:58:57 PM
IP: 68.170.199.45

Kathy> <But among all of those reasons the one thing that didn't cross very many minds was "Will Canada approve?" This election was about Americans making a decision for Americans.>

I don't think Whitbourne meant that Americans were trying to make decisions for anybody besides Americans. I think he refers to the people who are unhappy with Bush's win over Kerry and thus have decided to give up on American politics and leave the country.

I think he's right, too. Americans need to not throw in the towel when they don't get their way or even if they think it's a losing battle, because that would a) condemn America to the fate they're afraid it's headed towards now, and b) make so much less of the characters of the people trying to leave this mess behind.
Mecord's Cat
Wednesday, November 3, 2004 06:43:56 PM
IP: 67.40.106.231

Whitbourne > This election was about a lot of things for many different people. For some it was about telling the Bin Ladens of the world to "stick it." It was about voting for a leader who said what he thought and meant it without waiting for a poll to decide what he should be saying or thinking. It was about not being afraid to finish a job that was started correctly and not leaving an unstable area of the world (Iraq) in a lurch. For some Americans, it was about hanging on to what they've worked hard to earn and not be forced to pay for some new entitlement program. For others, it was about not voting for the guy (Edwards) who single-handedly did more to damage the state of health care by suing doctors until their malpractice insurance cried "Uncle" and so they were forced to quit delivering babies and providing other types of services. But among all of those reasons the one thing that didn't cross very many minds was "Will Canada approve.?"

This election was about Americans making a decision for Americans. Yeah, the rest of the world will be affected, because no one lives in a vaccuum, but this nonsense about disappointing the world by our choice of leaders is just that.

Now please get the mop and bucket out of the janitor's closet. You've leaked bile all over the floor and someone's going to track it on the carpet.
kathy
Wednesday, November 3, 2004 06:21:01 PM
IP: 66.82.9.80

Of course both are Illuminati. But the thing is, they know that GWB is a more useful pawn for them (there's no way in hell that either are high level illuminatis) so they MADE Kerry concede. So yes, they care about the election, they have a stake in it.

If I was in Ohio right now I'd be really pissed off. Do they still count those absentee ballots after the concession? And what if after the concession, they do keep counting and lo and behold Kerry woulda won?
Dezi
Wednesday, November 3, 2004 06:11:44 PM
IP: 68.57.196.146

Election results> I'm just glad it's over. i have more respect for Kerry for conceeding. There was so much talk about recounts and lawsuits I was afraid we'd have another bout of sore looserdom no matter who won. i also liked Kerry's advice, now that the elections are over, it's time to start playing nice again. If anything I think this election was damaging to the nation, not because of who won, but because of all the in-fighting it caused. Although some of it would have happened anyway.
Mecord
Wednesday, November 3, 2004 05:41:28 PM
IP: 67.40.106.231

*ahem*

...Sorry, early post.

...As I was saying, whit, I ain't never going back if I can help it. And don't expect things to change by the midterms, either. The way I see it, the process is only going to accelerate.

Anyway, its not like there was ever any real alternative. The dems were so scared of Bush that they never really listened when Kerry said he would have done the exact same stuff.
There was no choice.

This should be fun to watch, from a safe distance. Any wagers on the countdown to the draft?
V
Wednesday, November 3, 2004 04:08:01 PM
IP: 204.239.156.9

Screw Dat, Whit.
V
Wednesday, November 3, 2004 04:04:52 PM
IP: 204.239.156.9

Dezi:<.....the illuminati must be behind this......> You do realize that Both Kerry and W. Bush are Illuminati, so no matter who had won the election the Illuminati would maintain control. So the Illuminati really would NOT care who won the election!
Vinnie - [tpeano29@hotmail.com]
Marquette, Michigan, USA
Wednesday, November 3, 2004 03:09:35 PM
IP: 64.112.202.69

Anyone thinking of moving to Canada because of the election result: don't. We don't want you. We would rather you stayed there and fixed the mess that your fellow citizens have left. We have our work cut out for us making sure that whatever it is that has your country in throe doesn't infect us.

Stay there and fix this. You have two years till the midterms. We expect results.
Whitbourne
Wednesday, November 3, 2004 02:08:07 PM
IP: 156.34.93.85

Lynati: I was only kidding. Apparently, you don't watch the Simpsons. Where's Tharos when I need him?

Seriously, though, since I didn't vote for Bush, I would say that my vote was a step in "de-bushifying the nation." And there's no such thing as throwing your vote away. I agree with ironwolf. You vote for the man, and not the party. The idea is to make your voice heard, and let people know which candidate you believe in. I voted for Bush in the last election, and this election, I voted for Ralph Nader. I didn't care about Nader's chances of winning. I simply felt he would do a good job, and exercised my right to let my voice be heard.

Stalker: "And that's what voting is all about."
Dumbass Kid: "Now we know."
Duke: "And knowing is half the battle!"
Harvester of Eyes - [Minstrel75@aol.com]
Fredericksburg, VA, USA
Wednesday, November 3, 2004 01:16:13 PM
IP: 69.174.23.52

DPH > If you think the presidential campaign was fought dirty, it was nothing compared to some of the local races around here. You'd be amazed how much mud candidates will throw just to win a mayoral race or a seat in the state legislature. But I'd rather not ponder the political ads further, and simply be glad that they are over. And a pox on anyone who still has a campaign sign in their yard or a jack-o-latern on their front step by this time next week.
Patrick
Wednesday, November 3, 2004 12:36:02 PM
IP: 66.93.14.153

NOOOOOOOOOOO!!!

SAY IT ISNT SO!

.....the illuminati must be behind this......
Dezi
Wednesday, November 3, 2004 11:40:53 AM
IP: 68.57.196.146

Actually, there is one topic I'd like to hear comments about it: worst political ads. The ones that were outright lies, half-truths, and distortions.

And I'll start with the Kerry ad that took Bush's humorous press corp event way out of context to say that Bush thought certain things were a laughing matter.
DPH
AR, USA
Wednesday, November 3, 2004 10:49:32 AM
IP: 161.31.67.37

I know that was poorly written and i sorry had to sneak it in at work and couldnt proof read. Also it was not a flame at anyone just trying to get a point across that everyone in america is entitled to thier opinion and can choose who they want to lead them.
ironwolf
Wednesday, November 3, 2004 09:24:42 AM
IP: 167.1.129.100

what gets me is everyone complains about a 2 party system, but bashes people who vote for the man instead of the party. yea i voted ross in one election i dont think i pissed my vote away i was expressing my opinion on who i thought could due a good job, just like i did on this election by voting for bush over kerry. Why because i thought bush would due a better job. Its america people WE get to pick who WE want. I think your pissing your vote away if you tote the party line even if it is not something you belive in. Thats why Tn is republican because the last democrat senator turned her back on her voters and voted party, which was the total opposite of what she said she stood for and what the people wanted.
ironwolf
Wednesday, November 3, 2004 09:17:06 AM
IP: 167.1.129.100

Patrick:Those people who complain endlessly about the incumbent yet throw away their vote on a third-party candidate instead of supporting the only guy who stands a chance of ousting him... let me just say, that truly mistifys me beyond all possible combinations of four-letter words.

That's because s-m-a-r-t is five letters, and pragmatic doesn't even come close to being four. Me, personally, in another, kinder and gentler universe where the encumbent had been a man of principle and some intelligence, and where his staff had been competent and willing to take responsibility for mistakes or lack of good intelligence... I would have voted for Nader- with all of my heart.

Because as much as I have grown to like Kerry from the debates and his stints on the Daily Show, Nader is a grandfatherly figure, sort of goofy but smart who has always had my respect and stood for what I would like to stand for. But I voted for Nader in 2000, and part of my Catholic guilt is knowing that in doing so, I took a vote away from where it was needed.

I did not make the same mistake again. I voted for Kerry, because I do like him, I dig more of what he says and does than what Bush says and does. Because I can give Kerry the benefit of the doubt and I cannot do that for Bush because I have seen how Bush and his cabinet react to crisis and act when there is no crisis. Part of my principles is to be pragmatic when it comes to most things in life- and the cost of voting for a man I love who would not win, versus a man I like who could... is just to high a cost for me.
Shinigami
Wednesday, November 3, 2004 08:55:35 AM
IP: 64.12.116.137

Those people who complain endlessly about the incumbent yet throw away their vote on a third-party candidate instead of supporting the only guy who stands a chance of ousting him... let me just say, that truly mistifys me beyond all possible combinations of four-letter words.

I can't wait for the GOP legal eagles to descend on my state today and attempt to rush a count of the provisional ballots because they're too impatient to allow the 11-day statutory waiting period to pass.

34 days left until the spell is broken and they live again! Gargoyles Season One comes to DVD on December 7, 2004!
Patrick
Wednesday, November 3, 2004 06:29:23 AM
IP: 68.170.199.45

Harvestor of Eyes: So instead of casting a vote that would go towards de-bushifying the country, you threw it away on someone you knew wouldn't win?
Lynati
Wednesday, November 3, 2004 04:39:52 AM
IP: 172.142.199.104

Poor dph is just exhausted after working in the elections today as a poll worker. He's asked me to give brief highlights:

**BRIEF HIGHLIGHTS/stuff DPH deemed important at this point**

1)at 7:30am, when the polls opened, dph was just awestruck about the number of people waiting to vote. In fact, it took about 2 (or it was 3) hours to finally clear the numbers to a manageable level.

2)a republican poll watcher showed up for the sole purpose of keeping track of which republicans had voted so that later in the day, they would know who to contact to remind to vote.

2a)sorta related, the republican poll watcher stated that Marvin Parks, a personal friend of DPH, was expected to win the county but lose the race against Vic Synder. :-(((((

3)712 out of 1493 registered voters showed up. For those into math, if near 100% turnout had occurred, that would have been 2 voters every minute for all 12 hours of the day.

4)Marvin Parks, as DPH hoped, won DPH's precint. Did I mention Marvin Parks was well-known in this area, having been a bus driver, school teacher, and a local state representative?

**END BRIEF HIGHLIGHTS/stuff dph deemed important at this point**

BTW, there was 0 occurances of voter intimidation against minorities in DPH's precint; actually all minority voters were thanked for showing up.
dph's hologram
AR, USA
Tuesday, November 2, 2004 11:27:10 PM
IP: 67.14.195.6

I actually voted, but threw it away on a fourth party. And what's really odd is that I'm in a republican county in a democratic state.

Na zdorov'ya.
Gside - [gside@comcast.net]
Fair Haven, NJ
Tuesday, November 2, 2004 10:41:28 PM
IP: 68.83.187.89

Tharos: I know what you mean. If Ian Anderson were a citizen of the United States, I'd vote for him.

All I can say it, don't blame me if the nation gets in more trouble over the next four years, because I voted for Kodos.
Harvester of Eyes - [Minstrel75@aol.com]
Fredericksburg, VA, USA
Tuesday, November 2, 2004 10:24:14 PM
IP: 69.174.23.52

HoE:> <<I was listening to Alice Cooper's radio show at work today, and he said that he'd probably vote for Geddy Lee, because he (Alice) is really stupid. But as I learned last week, all elections make you choose between a douche and a turd.>>
I'd vote for Geddy because he rules at life. But then again... he's Canadian, so there goes that idea. And yes, love the Southpark reference (Best. Episode. Ever.).
Tharos
Tuesday, November 2, 2004 03:56:11 PM
IP: 165.190.89.139

Ok guys, today I get to see the election from a whole different angle... Through the news. I'm off to work now, and prolly won't be back until midnite. Also, my station, being the tiny little spanish sister station of the CBS affiliate (and no, none of us like Rather) will be going live for the first time ever. It is going to be INSANE. I fear this day.
So yeah. Pray for my soul.

Thank you, have a good day. :)
Dezi
Tuesday, November 2, 2004 08:26:39 AM
IP: 68.57.196.146

Yes, DPH sent me to relay a very important message. He will be working in the elections tomorrow as a poll worker. DPH has a pretty nice long, letter he's been working on for other reasons that he has decided to include in his post.

Draconis Mk IV - <Um...dude, where can I get one of those holograms? They look nifty.> Sorry, I'm not for sale, nor for rent, lease or any other type of arrangement where DPH isn't my immediate boss. If you want to talk to my master about the propertiary and interdimensionally-copyrighted technology involved bringing me to life, you'll just have to wait until he makes his next post.
dph's hologram
AR, USA
Tuesday, November 2, 2004 12:24:29 AM
IP: 67.14.195.36

Patrick> <<1 day left to make up your minds, all you undecided voters>>: I'll be voting for porn.

Na zdorov'ya.
Gside - [gside@comcast.net]
Fair Haven, NJ
Monday, November 1, 2004 11:18:19 PM
IP: 68.83.187.89

Oops, my apologies. I meant Twelfth.
Harvester of Eyes - [Minstrel75@aol.com]
Monday, November 1, 2004 07:44:52 PM
IP: 69.174.23.52

Eleventh, I presume?

I was listening to Alice Cooper's radio show at work today, and he said that he'd probably vote for Geddy Lee, because he (Alice) is really stupid. But as I learned last week, all elections make you choose between a douche and a turd.
Harvester of Eyes - [Minstrel75@aol.com]
Fredericksburg, VA, USA
Monday, November 1, 2004 07:44:00 PM
IP: 69.174.23.52

Just misses a top ten spot.
silvadel
Monday, November 1, 2004 06:32:02 PM
IP: 24.225.200.151

*eats the ten spot*
Mecord's Cat
Monday, November 1, 2004 04:32:56 PM
IP: 67.40.106.231

9th.
Na zdorov'ya.
Gside - [gside@comcast.net]
Fair Haven, NJ
Monday, November 1, 2004 04:27:16 PM
IP: 68.83.187.89

Eighth! Hope this will be an active week.
Taleweaver
Monday, November 1, 2004 04:14:16 PM
IP: 209.179.168.50

Seventh!
Leo
Monday, November 1, 2004 03:35:54 PM
IP: 68.231.241.236

SIX SIX SIX (pounder...)!

*looks around* Hm, no Children of Bodom fans I imagine.
Tharos
Monday, November 1, 2004 03:14:41 PM
IP: 165.190.89.139

Fifth?

Todd: Yes, that's what I love about 'Gargoyles' and TGS. I'm now aware of lots of fascinating legends I wouldn't have any idea of otherwise.
Ed
Monday, November 1, 2004 03:02:25 PM
IP: 131.111.236.130

(4th) Anyone for golf, FOUR!
Vinnie - [tpeano29@hotmail.com]
Marquette, Michigan, USA
Monday, November 1, 2004 02:58:54 PM
IP: 64.112.203.190

3rd!!
DPH
AR, USA
Monday, November 1, 2004 02:02:15 PM
IP: 161.31.67.37

Number the second!

Kathy > So how did you break the tie between that topic and the others? Just curious. And entries must be PG, yes? :: begins plotting evil ::

36 days left until the spell is broken and they live again! Gargoyles Season One comes to DVD on December 7, 2004!

1 day left to make up your minds, all you undecided voters!
Patrick
Monday, November 1, 2004 12:37:56 PM
IP: 66.93.14.153

First?? Cool! First!
Dezi
Monday, November 1, 2004 12:34:12 PM
IP: 68.57.196.146