In keeping with my theme of mutating the Democrats into the Libertarian Party, check out this blog that talks all about it. Also, apparently there is a Democratic Freedom Caucus that pushes the Democrats towards libertarian policies (just like the Republican Liberty Caucus). I'll be doing some reading at these sites. Join me, won't you?
This article from Knappster illustrates my point on election fraud much better than I did.
While the media falls all over itself to explain why last Tuesday's exit polls were "wrong," the fact remains that in states with auditable vote counts, the exit polling matched the counts to within 0.1%. It was only in states that used electronic voting machines, unencumbered by any "paper trail" which could be checked, that the results inexplicably tilted in Bush's favor by about a 5% margin over the exit polls.He goes on to explain his first hand experience with votes disappearing while monitoring returns for the Badnarik campaign on election night. I'm not sure I totally buy his reasoning, but the 5% figure cited above is startling. Moreover, I haven't heard any comparison of auditable to non-auditable system voting patterns in any of the major media. Hmm, what gives?
Hey, everybody likes comics - especially ones about honest Republicans.
Damn, Reason kinda sounds cool now. I used to think it was some objectivist rag.
My friend Wil (who does not like permalinks, apparently) misses the point on the "election fraud" meme:
While I'm sure there are real irregularities, I'm extremely doubtful anyone can make the case Kerry had the election stolen from him.But that really just confuses one issue with another. Whether or not Kerry won the election is one point. Whether or not every vote was or will be counted is entirely different. We have no business getting all high and mighty and telling people that every vote counts if we then turn around and act like some don't. Apparently, some votes don't count - or, at least it's not worth taking a moment to make sure they do. After 2000, the least the Democrats and Kerry could have done is chill out for a few days. It would be good for the nation to have a buffer between the all out campaigning season and the season where half the country get to be depressed..
And there's a larger issue here, too - the "rule by consensus" mentality that has been reached. The acceptance of Bush as the acknowledged winner is itself used as the reason not to give credence to allegations of irregularities. Perhaps the currently known irregularities are not sufficient to change the outcome, as Wil points out. But the point of bringing irregularities to light is NOT to use them as arguments to overturn the outcome. The point is to provide a basis for further scrutiny, so that we can have a legitimate, widely agreed upon outcome - ya'know, the one that matters. The point is to have an election where the final results are trusted. Which implies the need to wait till said results are final.
I don't think taking our time in getting the count right is too much to ask after the hijinks of 2000. Hell, there may be irregularities we haven't even conceived of. We don't know unless we take the time and effort to look. But the media at large seems bent on squelching any and all doubt in the outcome, as if the outcome is all that matters. It is not all that matters, unless you only want to satisfy the pundits, who can box this outcome into their neat little package. Nobody is served when consensus, and not a fair and open investigation, determines whether or not the vote was legit.
It's Veterans Day. But I'm not sure veterans need our support. They seem to already think they're the shit. I get their sacrifice shoved down my throat everytime a flag is waved. The whole feeling approaches one of mindless worship. Is it really true that everytime a member of the Armed Force so much as picks his nose, he is defending freedom and fighting for my rights? How can we have a rational debate about a sector of society that is glorified beyond belief? Most of the military people I've known are modest and pretty low key - in short, they don't feel like the country owes them (except for pension and health care, two areas where it is generally agreed upon that the government has failed to live up to its end of the bargain).
I do, however, have a problem when certain veterans or active military try to make others feel indebted to them because of their "sacrifice". Or when politicians use somebody else's sacrifice to force their agenda upon people. Dubya, I am looking in your direction. I have no problem supporting (whatever that means) any veteran who is actually exposed to danger and:
Serving in the military against his or her will (drafted), or
My main man Bill Maher may be a snob, but he's funny and right:
Sorry, there I go again, kidding when I should be healing. Hey, say what you will about the Republicans, they do stand for something: Armageddon, but it's something. Democrats, on the other hand, have been coasting for years on Tom Daschle's charisma. But that's not enough anymore. Democrats will never win another election if they keep trying to siphon off votes from the Republicans. They will only win by creating a lot more Democrats. And you don't do that by trying to leach onto issues that you should be denouncing.Uhh, no, no comment from me. I have nothing to add.You wind up - you wind up in a goose-hunting outfit a week before the election--trying to appeal to guys who would sooner vote for the goose. Guys who even in down-to-earth, economically-ailing Ohio, thought blowjobs more important than job-jobs.
Hey, these folks aren't "undecideds." They're not in play. No, what the Democrats need are fresh, new ideas that are dumb and hateful enough to win these people over.
Does anybody on the Internet not read Andrew Sullivan?
I don't have anything against the guy, I just don't like his site.
This is a great article with a good point:
Surely we have not been reduced to arguing that we are not as bad as terrorists, writes Waleed Aly.Too many innocent people are dying in Iraq. A recent report, in the medical journal The Lancet, estimates 100,000 Iraqi civilians have been killed since the beginning of the US-led invasion. Half of them are women and children. Almost all were killed by coalition air strikes.
Take a minute to think about the enormity of this human cost. Think of it as September 11, 30 times over.
WTF, now I'm agreeing with James Carville?
One possibility, he said, was to embrace a reform-oriented, anti-Washington agenda. That would require the ability of members of Congress to reject pork projects for their districts and stake the party's fortunes on fiscal discipline.Put that in your pipe and smoke it, Wil. Apparently, the Democrats are reading my blog.
Hey, almost forgot to mention that there's some new features on 6thdensity.net. I've got a gallery system now and also a pemanent place to store my music. Hell, there might even be more shit on there. Who knows.
The "all seeing eye" is quite ubiquitous lately, isn't it?
This is from Eminem's new video decrying the Iraq war:
Hey, what's that in the bottom right hand corner?
And to top it all off, let's make a movie about it:
What a bunch of idiots "they" are...
Y'know what's cool? Going to bars, drinking, throwing darts, and talking to good friends. It's the simple pleasures, yo.
I'm still thinking and talking about the election. Which is wierd, since about one day before hand I couldn't have cared less who won. And now it's like I'm a fucking pinko commie Democrat.
Arthur Silber (my DNS at home is being a piece of shit so I can't find a link to him, just go down the page if you need one you lazy ass) wrote a great essay on what he calls contextual libertarianism. Which I consider a great leap for an Objectivist. Anyway, the basic idea is to advance your politics without the proverbial stick of rigid principles up your ass. Y'know, the basic pompousity problem of the LP and libertarianism in general. Lord knows I exemplify it sometimes, but since I've found this newly discovered affinity with Democrats and liberals in general (I've recognized it for some time but only lately has it approached the level where I would have to acknowledge it) it's made me particularly anxious and confused. I don't know why.
Silber puts it quite simply. He simply says that if he had to choose between the repressed, rigid, morally consistent Salem-esque world of the staunch Republicans and the near communist, atheistic, communal, hippie patchouli-infested smugness of the staunch Democrats, he'll take the liberals anyday. I have to agree. But it really is a shame.
Jane Smiley appears to agree with me:
The reason the Democrats have lost five of the last seven presidential elections is simple: A generation ago, the big capitalists, who have no morals, as we know, decided to make use of the religious right in their class war against the middle class and against the regulations that were protecting those whom they considered to be their rightful prey-workers and consumers. The architects of this strategy knew perfectly well that they were exploiting, among other unsavory qualities, a long American habit of virulent racism, but they did it anyway, and we see the outcome now-Cheney is the capitalist arm and Bush is the religious arm. They know no boundaries or rules. They are predatory and resentful, amoral, avaricious, and arrogant. Lots of Americans like and admire them because lots of Americans, even those who don't share those same qualities, don't know which end is up. Can the Democrats appeal to such voters? Do they want to? The Republicans have sold their souls for power. Must everyone?Then she goes off the deep end:
Progressives have only one course of action now: React quickly to every outrage-red state types love to cheat and intimidate, so we have to assume the worst and call them on it every time. We have to give them more to think about than they can handle-to always appeal to reason and common sense, and the law, even when they can't understand it and don't respond.But this just keeps Democrats on the defensive, precisely where the Republicans want them. Isn't it time for a new approach - one that appeals to the best in every American without marginalizing them?
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 3.0 Unported License.
Social Memory Complex (http://socialmemorycomplex.net) © 2004 - 2020 Jeremy Weiland
