The Politics Thread - Read the First Post

[daddykat]

Gatito Grande; with me sarcasm and regular arguments tend to be inextricably mixed. (I referred to Ronnie as my political idol because I consider myself far right and in the 1980 elections he made that acceptable again. However I do recognize him as being, to use Steve Allen's word, "unbright".)

Well, I'm no expert but I am very familiar with higher critical theories and Luke and Acts ahve generally held up the best, after a hard core of Paul's letters, as being written as single pieces by an identifiable author so I'm skeptical about all-of-a-sudden discoveries of interpolations in it etc. The fact is, I regard both Matthew and Luke as divinely inspired books and so I regard the Virgin Birth as a basic doctrine.

As to a mistranslation of Isaiah, yes, that passage has been used *by the church* as an argument for the Virgin Birth but I don't think anyone sees it as the *inspiration* of the Virgin Birth stories circulating in the ear;liest church from which the 2 evangelists got their versions. It's actually soemwaht irrelevant anyway; whule there are plenty of Messianic prophecies in the Ot, esp. in the second third of Isaiah, that particular passage isn't one. (This is not a critical discovery but is actually quite apparent when the entire passage is read carefully.) The "young woman" the prophet was referring to was not the future mother of the Messiah but a woman of the court who was actually standing there while he was confronting the king.

As to Mark or Paul not mentioning it, that doesn't strike me much. Mark's Gospel reads (in my eyes) like soemone trying to quickly throw togethger an account of Jesus's public ministry as a teaching document since the eyewitnesses were aging and dying. so he was probably making no attempt to include everything he might have heard. As to Paul, given his irregular relationship with the Jerusalem church, he may nver have heard the stories. Or, with his thoruogh education, he might have simply not believed it himself.

The thing is, the Virgin Birth is portrayed as a miracle, an intervention. And if one regards God as omnipotent, it's no more inherently impossible than the healings or the feeding of the multitudes. By contrast (and maybe I should really be taking this up with the author of the roiginal article) being a creationist involves the rejection of a large number of valid observations and of basic scientific principles which work in other areas. So I see no inherent connection between believing in the Virgin Birth or other miracle stories on the one hand and rejecting modern biology in favor of the first 11 chapters of Genesis or modern archaeology in favor of the Book of Judges on the other.

But then (and I'm being totally serious here) this is from a guy who regards Heisenberg's Uncertainty Principle as consistent with simple common sense, so I really don't know how convincing my arguments on *any* subject are for anyone else.



drlloyd; As to Broomhall's article, if he does have any solid statistics to back up his assertion that gays indulge in a larger number of palyful activiites or have a greater neeed for physical touching than straights (and I wonder about that) it still begs the nature-vs-nurutre question. To what extent are the statistics he's using influenced by social role-playing of predetermined "straight" and "gay" personae. Methinks it's just another attempt to use reverse stereotyping to make a point along the lines of _The Iceman Inheritance_.



*instead of double posting, edit your first post and add anything new to that one.

Edited by: Warduke at: 8/27/03 1:00 pm

[Gatito Grande]

Quote:

---

I referred to Ronnie as my political idol because I consider myself far right and in the 1980 elections he made that acceptable again.

---

. . . otherwise known as the Year of Great Catastrophe (until 2000 made it pale in comparison).



daddykat (you and DCA are the same person I take it?), I'm going to have to file you w/ "4WiccanLove" as someone w/ whom it's best for my blood-pressure not to discuss politics. I take my leave appreciating your evident love for Willow&Tara, even though w/ "far right" politics, I'm mystified as to how you do that.



GG Speaking of which, anybody catch "Family Fundamentals" on POV last night? Talk about cognitive dissonance at its *most* painful Out

[daddykat]

Actually I tend to go a little over the top when I discuss politics anyway so I often avoid it. As to being Far Rigth I call myself that for a lot of reasons but I don't know how anyone else classes me; when I go into a voting booth there are only so many choices after all. As republicans go I class myself with the eccentric wing instead of either the moderate or hard-core types.





As to my alias, I joined here as daddykat when the UPN board was still up and that was my alias there. Recently (so I could post at the Essence of Amber messageboard) I had to actually join ezboard so I used the same alias I use at most other showbiz sites and, depending from where I come into this board, soemtimes I'm locked into it.

As for adoring Willow and Tara, well, with the directions most of my own relationships (roamntic and relatives) have taken the past couple years, I needed soem serious on-screen reminding that love isn't an illusion and caring isn't a lie. And ALy and AMber certainly showed that.





*instead of double posting, edit your first post and add anything new to that one.

Edited by: Warduke at: 8/30/03 3:20 pm

[Gatito Grande]

The last couple of months, I've had so much on my mind re: the (going on, and on, and on, and on) War in Iraq, I haven't known where to begin (or end). The situation just gets more and more distressing and depressing: it's the elephant in the living room that you can't ignore (no matter how much you want to). The following, however, is a very apt summation:

Quote:

---

Facing the truth about Iraq

By James Carroll, Boston Globe



THE WAR IS LOST. By most measures of what the Bush administration forecast for its adventure in Iraq, it is already a failure. The war was going to make the Middle East a more peaceful place. It was going to undercut terrorism. It was going to show the evil dictators of the world that American power is not to be resisted. It was going to improve the lives of ordinary Iraqis. It was going to stabilize oil markets. The American army was going to be greeted with flowers. None of that happened. The most radical elements of various fascist movements in the Arab world have been energized by the invasion of Iraq. The American occupation is a rallying point for terrorists. Instead of undermining extremism, Washington has sponsored its next phase, and now moderates in every Arab society are more on the defensive than ever.



Before the war, the threat of America's overwhelming military dominance could intimidate, but now such force has been shown to be extremely limited in what it can actually accomplish. For the sake of "regime change," the United States brought a sledge hammer down on Iraq, only to profess surprise that, even as Saddam Hussein remains at large, the structures of the nation's civil society are in ruins. The humanitarian agencies necessary to the rebuilding of those structures are fleeing Iraq.



The question for Americans is, Now what? Democrats and Republicans alike want to send in more US soldiers. Some voices are raised in the hope that the occupation can be more fully "internationalized," which remains unlikely while Washington retains absolute control. But those who would rush belligerent reinforcements to Iraq are making the age-old mistake.



When brutal force generates resistance, the first impulse is to increase force levels. But, as the history of conflicts like this shows, that will result only in increased resistance. Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld has rejected the option of more troops for now, but, in the name of force-protection, the pressures for escalation will build as US casualties mount. The present heartbreak of one or two GI deaths a day will seem benign when suicide bombers, mortar shells, or even heavier missile fire find their ways into barracks and mess halls.



Either reinforcements will be sent to the occupation, or present forces will loosen the restraints with which they reply to provocation. Both responses will generate more bloodshed and only postpone the day when the United States must face the truth of its situation.



The Bush administration's hubristic foreign policy has been efficiently exposed as based on nothing more than hallucination. High-tech weaponry can kill unwilling human beings, but it cannot force them to embrace an unwanted idea. As rekindled North Korean and Iranian nuclear programs prove, Washington's rhetoric of "evil" is as self-defeating as it is self-delusional. No one could have predicted a year ago that the fall from the Bush high horse of American Empire would come so hard and so quickly. Where are the comparisons with Rome now? The rise and fall of imperial Washington took not hundreds of years, but a few hundred days.



Sooner or later, the United States must admit that it has made a terrible mistake in Iraq, and it must move quickly to undo it. That means the United States must yield not only command of the occupation force, but participation in it. The United States must renounce any claim to power or even influence over Iraq, including Iraqi oil. The United States must accept the humiliation that would surely accompany its being replaced in Iraq by the very nations it denigrated in the build-up to the war.



With the United States thus removed from the Iraqi crucible, those who have rallied to oppose the great Satan will loose their raison d'etre, and the Iraqi people themselves can take responsibility for rebuilding their wrecked nation.



All of this might seem terribly unlikely today, but something like it is inevitable. The only question is whether it happens over the short term, as the result of responsible decision-making by politicians in Washington, or over the long term, as the result of a bloody and unending horror.



The so-called "lessons" of Vietnam are often invoked by hawks and doves alike, but here is one that applies across the political spectrum. The American people saw that that war was lost in January 1968, even as the Tet Offensive was heralded as a victory by the Pentagon and the White House. But for five more years, Washington refused to face the truth of its situation, until at last it had no choice.



Because American leaders could not admit the nation's mistake, and move to undo it, hundreds of thousands of people died, or was it millions? The war in Iraq is lost. What will it take to face that truth this time?

---

www.smirkingchimp.com/pri...?sid=12779



GG Invade in haste, repent at leisure Out

[daddykat]

while I think Carroll may be on the right track with *some* of what he suggests, I just don't find him convincing. Not questioning his statistics per se but ther's too much of the tone of "we're doing it so it must be wrong" in it.

What really disgusts me (and it shouldn't as nobody , regardless of position, fails to do it as often as possible) is the misrepresentation of history. The Tet offensive was exactly that, a massive attack by Viet Cong and NVA forces, and US/ARVN/Allied forces repelled it in effective order using standard military practice. It even succeeded to the extent that the Viet Cong ceased to exist as a serious fighting force after that and the NVA took over more or less completely. But the Great God Cronkite declared it a defeat and so everyone believed it.

[kajo 2000]

From Reuters:

Quote:

---

Pvt. Lynch to Tell Story in $1 Million Book Deal

Tue September 2, 2003 12:09 PM ET

By Mark Egan



NEW YORK (Reuters) - Former prisoner of war Jessica Lynch has signed a $1 million agreement with Alfred A. Knopf, giving the injured former U.S. Army private the chance to tell her own story, the publisher said on Tuesday.



The publisher said the book, "I Am a Soldier, Too: The Jessica Lynch Story," will be written by former New York Times reporter Rick Bragg.



Sources familiar with the book said it will tell the tale of a small town girl who goes to war and becomes a national hero, recognition she does not feel she deserves.



Sources at Knopf said the publisher will pay $1 million to Bragg and the Lynch family. Bragg will be paid a flat fee for producing the book while the Lynch family will receive part of the advance and all of the royalties.



"I have been heartened by the hope and faith of the American people and by the tireless effort of the U.S. Armed Forces," Lynch said in a statement issued by the publisher.



Lynch said many Americans had written offering their support to her. "I feel I owe them all this story, which will be about more than a girl going off to war and fighting alongside her fellow soldiers.



Lynch was granted an honorable military discharge last week due to her injuries. An army private, she became a symbol of American patriotism during the war, which generated controversy as accounts of her rescue in Iraq varied.



A source familiar with the book said it will tell, "what she saw and what she remembers" of the Iraq ordeal. The source said the book would tell the story of, "a kid from the back woods who goes to war and becomes this national hero who doesn't really feel as though she is a hero."



The 20-year-old supply clerk was captured by Iraqi forces on March 23 near the city of Nassiriya. Eleven other U.S. soldiers were killed and nine wounded in the incident.



U.S. commandos rescued Lynch from an Iraqi hospital on April 1. An early media report quoted unnamed U.S. officials saying she fought fiercely before being captured. But the Army later concluded she was injured when her Humvee crashed into another vehicle in the convoy after being hit by a rocket-propelled grenade. Their report said a tired company commander misread his map and took a wrong turn.



Lynch was given a hero's welcome when she returned to her hometown of Palestine, West Virginia, on July 22. But the full details of her story have yet to be told since Lynch said she suffered a loss of memory after her capture.



She was awarded the Bronze Star, the Purple Heart and the Prisoner of War medal.



Pulitzer-Prize winner Bragg resigned from The New York Times earlier this year after allegations that he relied too heavily on the work of a freelancer.



Knopf is a unit of Random House, which is owned by Bertelsmann AG.

---

---------

"I want to be Byron... because I want to date young boys." Amber Benson

[Gatito Grande]

daddycat, I don't wanna turn this into a history thread. And I can't honestly tell you of what *I* thought about the Tet Offensive (I just turned 6 in January of '68: my very first "political" memory is of Robert JFK's assassignation in June). But I can give you an, um, "impression" of that time.



I think what changed the picture of Vietnam more than anything at that time, were the *pictures*, not the analysis. Two pictures in particular: the South Vietnamese general executing the Viet Cong guy on the spot during Tet, and the U.S. napalm-bombing of the children a few of years later. These two picture cemented in the American mind, broadly, not so much whether the U.S. and its proxies were winning, but whether that war was worth winning.



GG And w/ the kind of "victory" that Dubya defines as "Mission Accomplished," that's the question we're facing again. Out

[daddykat]

Images; it so often boils down to that; my old man used ot og on at length about the little girl running with her clothes torn off. (Vice my best friend in college, very verbally oriented, who said "and she wasn't really hurt that badly" which is debatabel but my friend couldn't grasp thta that wasn't the crucial point, it was how we the audience reacted.)The Senator who recommended solving Viet Nam by "declare victory and get out" understood images. Cmapaign managers do; policy people so often don't and it gets to the point where the people responsible for whatever action is in question think they're doing soemthing wholly different from what's really going on. Based on what *wasn't done* in Afghanistan I wonder if our Iraq policymakers can even grasp what's happening. Having been in the Federal government (some years prior to my current homeless chapter) I can testify that things mean what the regulations say they mean and not well, anything else.

[Ben Varkentine]

Just finished the Al Franken book. A pretty good read, though it does get bogged down in statistics in parts. And as Franken also admits, it is kind of the same thing as Eric Alterman's book, but funnier (and probably reaching more people).



Many of the points have been made before, but need to be made again until enough people listen and we get Bush out of the White House.



Fortunately, thanks to Bill O'Reilly and Fox news, Franken hardly needed to publicize the book at all and could just sit back and watch it float to the top of the bestsellers.

Ben



"We are all one. And if we do not know, we will learn it the hard way."

-- Bayard Rustin, organizer of the 1963 March on Washington

[urnofosiris]

Yesterday the Swedish foreign minister Anna Lindh died after having been stabbed in broad daylight and in public.



Here is a report shortly after the fact in which the extend of her injuries is grossly underestimated, but that does explain who she is and the impact of this act:

www.x-stream.co.uk/cgi-bi...uters.html



and today:

www.timesonline.co.uk/art...08,00.html



This is such an evil cowardly act and such a waste of life. There aren't nearly enough influential female politicians in this world and now one has been senselessly taken away from her family, friends and country.

[drlloyd11]

Quote:

---

What really disgusts me (and it shouldn't as nobody , regardless of position, fails to do it as often as possible) is the misrepresentation of history. The Tet offensive was exactly that, a massive attack by Viet Cong and NVA forces, and US/ARVN/Allied forces repelled it in effective order using standard military practice. It even succeeded to the extent that the Viet Cong ceased to exist as a serious fighting force after that and the NVA took over more or less completely. But the Great God Cronkite declared it a defeat and so everyone believed it.

---

I really have to wade in here. Cronkike declared it a defeat because it WAS a defeat. It meant that the VC and NVA were not broken like the DoD had claimed, and it meant they could still mount an offensive. But worst of all it meant that the North didnt care how many people they lost to get to there aims. They never lacked for volunteers or sympathizers. And they never considered backing down.

This is not a critism of them or anyone else, its just a fact.



My father fought in Vietnam in the 1st air cav (second brigade). He was very blue colar, very conservative, and very blunt on the topic of Vietnam : He said it was a horrible waste of life, all the lives lost. On that I am inclined to agree with him.

In end, I am prouder of my country for walking away from the war, than any victory would have been in that circumstance.

[DaddyCatALSO]

drlloyd; Definitions are important things and any response I make would be just arguing over definitions of the word "defeat" and therefore pointless. But as to "walking away" , I think that might be a good word to sum up "cobbling together a phony cease-fire that everyone knew would only last a few weeks and removing our troops from the country and pretending things were over" like we did in '73. Not that I was complaining at the time; I graduated high school that year and had to consdier the draft as a personal issue.

[maudmac]

Censored 2004: The Top 25 Censored Media Stories of 2002-2003 is up at the Project Censored website.



Check it out if you're interested in what you might've missed in the mainstream news, like:



#1: The Neoconservative Plan for Global Dominance



#2: Homeland Security Threatens Civil Liberty



#3: US Illegally Removes Pages from Iraq U.N. Report



#4: Rumsfeld's Plan to Provoke Terrorists



#5: The Effort to Make Unions Disappear



#6: Closing Access to Information Technology



#7: Treaty Busting by the United States



#8: US/British Forces Continue Use of Depleted Uranium Weapons Despite Massive Evidence of Negative Health Effects



#9: In Afghanistan: Poverty, Women's Rights, and Civil Disruption Worse than Ever



#10: Africa Faces Threat of New Colonialism



#11: U.S. Implicated in Taliban Massacre



#12: Bush Administration Behind Failed Military Coup in Venezuela



#13: Corporate Personhood Challenged



#14: Unwanted Refugees a Global Problem



#15: U.S. Military's War on the Earth



#16: Plan Puebla-Panama and the FTAA



#17: Clear Channel Monopoly Draws Criticism



#18: Charter Forest Proposal Threatens Access to Public Lands



#19: U.S. Dollar vs. the Euro: Another Reason for the Invasion of Iraq



#20: Pentagon Increases Private Military Contracts



#21: Third World Austerity Policies: Coming Soon to a City Near You



#22: Welfare Reform Up For Reauthorization, but Still No Safety Net



#23: Argentina Crisis Sparks Cooperative Growth



#24: Aid to Israel Fuels Repressive Occupation in Palestine



#25: Convicted Corporations Receive Perks Instead of Punishment

---

Walking in space we find the purpose of peace. The beauty of life you can no longer hide.
Our eyes are open, our eyes are open. Our eyes are open, our eyes are open wide, wide, wide. -- Walking In Space

[Diebrock]

Inside Guantanamo

This aired last sunday on BBC.

If you didn't see it read the transcript of this documentary if you ever wondered what is going on there. The link is halfway down in the article.

_________________

How can you kill people who killed people, to show that killing people is wrong?

I've kissed her best friend. I've reached into her best friend's pocket and fished around for keys. And I gave her best friend my number. I must be doing something totally, totally wrong... - TBSOL by Dreams

[Gatito Grande]

At some point on this thread, I predicted that the Recall of California Governor Davis would go down to defeat. I made that prediction long pre-Ahnold, but nevertheless GG hereby signs up for the requisite lumps (Hey, I predicted Giants over the Marlins too: So I'm not the world's greatest prognosticator, 'aight?).



But if I've lost a bet, it's nothing compared to what the People of California have lost: the respect of those people, around the world, who believe in democracy as the best method for people to govern themselves, not play starstruck media-whores to the biggest celebrity w/ the biggest wallet. (The grotesque, perverted misogyny of the Governor-Elect is just a Bonus! )



Once a Californian, always a Californian---but I am deeply embarrassed for my native State.



GG Almost makes me glad I didn't get either of my two "dream jobs" Back Home. Well, almost . . . Out

[xita]

I cry for my state and what's to come.

- - - - - - - - - - -
"Freedom is just another word for nothing left to lose."

-Me & Bobby
McGee

[SuperMandy13]

*sighs* I can't even complain about the idiocy that I expect will come, 'cause stupid me forgot to send out my absentee ballot thingy in time. It's always been my belief that if you don't vote, you can't say anything. So, I think I'll just slip into the apathy that comes so naturally to my generation. It won't make anything better, but it will darn well let me tune out all the insanity and stupidity. *hmphs*



-Mandy

[4WiccanLuv]

According to our state registrar’s office, there are far more registered Democrats than Republicans in California. So how did the recall pass? Perhaps a partisan coup as many have suggested? I don’t buy it! People came out in droves to vote and party lines were crossed in large numbers. See exit polls here. IMO, the popular decision is usually the right one. Please have faith in the common person, our founders did and they clearly made a provision for a recall in our state’s constitution for a reason.



Arguments against the recall are based on the idea that the public is too stupid to know what it wants or needs. People can govern themselves, as proven by yesterday's statewide election. Democracy at its finest! I’m proud to be a Californian and look forward real change!

_____________


"Let every nation know, whether it wishes us well or ill, that we shall pay any price, bear any burden, meet any hardship, support any friend, oppose any foe, to assure the survival and success of liberty." - John F. JFK

[urnofosiris]

Quote:

---

IMO, the popular decision is usually the right one.

---

Ok, you say usually so that leaves room for not always. History and current (global) events show how dangerous the popular decision can be. Also what is popular today can change relatively overnight, as has been the case in my own country, but for the next 4 years we will be paying the price for last year's popular votes in our national elections.

The last mosquito that bit me had to check into the Betty Ford Clinic.

--Patsy Stone

[Warduke]

Quote:

---

IMO, the popular decision is usually the right one.

---

Really? Well if you take a look at the GLBT thread and you'll see what the popular decision is worth.

---

Firebird: One Browser To Rule Them All.

[Ben Varkentine]

I just got me a blog I hope Kittens will take a look at. It'll be my look at politics, current events, etc.



Leave me a couplea comments, why don'tcha?

Ben



"We are all one. And if we do not know, we will learn it the hard way."

-- Bayard Rustin, organizer of the 1963 March on Washington

[4WiccanLuv]

Quote:

---

Really? Well if you take a look at the GLBT thread and you'll see what the popular decision is worth.

---

I have, thank you.



Speaking for myself, I'm not going to worry about what governor elect Schwarzenegger might do according to an emotional and bitter sounding assemblyman, Mark Leno and the SF Chronicle (must be kin to the L.A. Times). Schwarzenegger is a social liberal, which I think is why he appealed to such a huge spectrum of people and won convincingly.

_____________


"Let every nation know, whether it wishes us well or ill, that we shall pay any price, bear any burden, meet any hardship, support any friend, oppose any foe, to assure the survival and success of liberty." - John F. JFK

[urnofosiris]

I've always liked Arnold Schwarzenegger, but I am not sure I would want him to lead my country if that were possible. Anyway, I just heard him make a speech saying he wants to represent all people. Let's hope he means it.

The last mosquito that bit me had to check into the Betty Ford Clinic.

--Patsy Stone

[seurat]

I've always kinda liked Arnold too. But in the movies, not running a state, especially not one as important as California. He may well be a social 'liberal" but he is still a Republican, and the recent revelations about his past behavior towards women are deeply disturbing, even if it turns out some of the accusations are without foundation. I will wait and give him a chance to prove himself, but I can't see this as a positive development.

"Always took candy from strangers/ Didn't wanna get me no trade/ Never want to be like Papa/ Working for the boss every night and day. I need a love to keep me happy, baby won't you keep me happy."-Keith Richards

[Gatito Grande]

Well, as always on this thread, I begin w/ why we're all here: imagine Willow and Tara trooping to the Sunnydale polls (if Sunnydale is Santa Barbara, I imagine they've gotten rid of their punchcards). Does anyone believe they voted for the Terminator?



But for those Kittens who are excited by the new Governor-Elect, enjoy. I just trust y'all are excited by his policies (his what?), and not by his hands on your . . . .



GG Willow voted for Camejo, while Tara, looking to avoid the scene at the polls, voted absentee a couple of weeks ago for Huffington (they both voted No on the Recall). Out

[darkmagicwillow]

GG, I don't understand why you think the recall wasn't democratic. It was a opportunity for the people to express their opinion about their government. What's not democratic about that?



While you may not like the result (and really, was it any more a popularity contest than any other large-scale American election?), the recall is one more demonstration as to how we're moving to a more democratic society, like the citizen initiative movements in states like Oregon and Washington. The trend towards greater democracy has persisted since the founding of the US when neither senators nor presidential electors were selected by popular vote as they are today.



While there are problems with greater democracy, I think the benefits are greater than the risks. If we'd eliminated the elitist remnants of the presidential election process (the electoral college), then the shenanigans in the Florida voting process wouldn't have mattered because the decision in the popular vote was clear despite the dubious and muddy nature of the electoral vote. I'd love to have the ability to vote on a recall for Bush now that his lies about the war on Iraq are appearing in the mainstream press.

--

"Omnia mutantur, nihil interit." -- "Everything changes, but nothing is truly lost."

Edited by: darkmagicwillow at: 10/8/03 5:39 pm

[darkmagicwillow]

The primary reason I look for experience in a candidate is so I can judge what they'll do in the future from what they've done in the past. However, I'm not sure how valuable political experience is to actually running a government. The primary quality difference I see in long-term politicians is in how well they campaign and market themselves, not in how well they deal with the issues of governance.



A greater determiner of the quality of governance is the quality of advisors that a politician surrounds himself with, along with the ability to know when to listen to them and when to ignore them. That's an ability that can be developed in many circumstances, but to a large extent, whether a person listens or not seems to be an inborn trait, from the managers and politicians I've observed and the biographies I've read. FDR was a slacker and not that bright, flunking more than one class in law school, but he had great men as advisors and became one of our greatest presidents on their skill and his charisma.



Arnold has charisma and an excellent set of advisors, especially in finance, but will he listen to them? The uncertainty of a new position causes people to react in different ways and without a track record, we don't know, so we remain uncertain and only time will tell.

--

"Omnia mutantur, nihil interit." -- "Everything changes, but nothing is truly lost."

[Gatito Grande]

DMW, I just have the above header because I hit "Add a Reply": I don't know who originally posted it.



However, I could see an argument to be made that the recall---this recall---was an (ab)use of an admittedly badly-written election law. Ergo, it was neither representative, nor even reasonable direct democracy, but (purchased) popularity-rule run amok: one step away from a mob.



GG Having said that, I think that Ahnold will be lawfully Governor moreso than Dubya is lawfully President . . . but that's not saying much! Out

[xita]

I completely agree GG. It's dangerously close to being undemotratic. To revoke an election with so little undermines our democracy. It can turn our election process into a joke. A million signatures in this state are easy to obtain by either party. We'll be having recalls all the time under this law. Think of a presidential veto, to override this, the legislature needs a whole lot more than 50% to do it. They need 2/3.



A recall in my mind should require at least 70% of the vote to override a legal election. The people had voted, that's democratic. Davis wasn't doing anything illegal, otherwise there is impeachment to consider. That's my opinion. I think this recall process is very dangerous and threatens the importance of our democratic elections.

- - - - - - - - - - -
"Freedom is just another word for nothing left to lose."

-Me & Bobby
McGee

Edited by: xita  at: 10/8/03 8:02 pm

[maudmac]

It's nine months until my state's primary, but I finally sat down tonight and really looked at the Democratic candidates' positions on the issues. CNN.com has this handy primary preview thing. It makes it easy to compare the candidates' positions on various issues, like affirmative action, gay marriage, oil drilling in the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge, health care issues, the Patriot Act, immigration, the war in Iraq, abortion, capital punishment, gun control, tax cuts, etc. It features each of the 9 candidates and Bush.



The point of all this is that I'm undecided about who I'd like to get the nomination, but in reading all that, it became really clear to me that I would prefer any of them to Bush. Seeing Bush's positions contrasted with even the Democratic candidates who lean a little to the right is really eye-opening about how diametrically opposed the two parties are on so many issues.



I'm actually not even a Democrat, either, but we all know that no third party candidate will be in the White House for a very, very long time, if ever. (Yes, I do think Nader cost Gore the presidency and I'm bitter about that.) But what I wanted to say is that my impression of the Democrats vying for the nomination in past elections is that they were too right wing, making the Democratic Party seem almost indistinguishable from the GOP at times. (There's a reason why Libertarians and Greens and whoever all else have often referred to them as "Demopublicans" and "Republicrats.")



So I think it's nice to see Democrats actually being Democrats this time around, Democrats I might be able to vote for without gritting my teeth and marking the little bubble on the ballot with a pencil clenched in a fist of rage.



Is it possible this will be the first election about which I cannot use the phrase "lesser of two evils"? I hope so. Still more than a year away, but I do love me some politics and I'm ready to start talking about all this stuff now. I want to vote already!



This post really serves little purpose except just to pass along that handy CNN.com thingy to anyone who cares. And to inflict my "it's 3:30 in the morning and everyone but me is asleep" thoughts upon you all. Thanks for listening.

---

I have often been adrift, but I have always stayed afloat.    --  David Berry,  The Whales of August