Print Story Election Day
Family
By toxicfur (Sun Oct 26, 2008 at 04:08:15 PM EST) (all tags)
t's just over a week before Election Day, here in the United States. For many people (myself included), this is the most important election we have an opportunity to vote in, for many reasons, both practical and symbolic.

This story, though, isn't about "many people." This story isn't about that tightness I get in my chest -- that pride in my country, bittersweet and magnificent -- that threatens to overwhelm me with emotion when I think about casting my vote for Barack Obama.

This story is about the last conversation I had with my grandfather, only a few weeks before he died in April, 2007.


Cross-posted to Facebook for my friends list, especially the right-wingers.


A little background. I was the (apparently) lone liberal in a rather conservative North Carolina family. When I went to college, I became -- for the first time, really -- more than vaguely interested in politics, and, more importantly, I found the words for the feelings I'd had that the politics I'd been raised with were just not right.

I came out, as it were, as a liberal (before I came out in the more conventional sense of the word).

Granddaddy was, I think, more amused than anything at my sudden interest in politics, and my new outspoken opinionated-ness. So we argued in a good-natured way (at least from his perspective), often at the Sunday lunch table, about why I thought Jesse Helms was evil, and why Hillary Clinton could save healthcare if those damnable Republicans would just get out of her way and if Rush Limbaugh would just stop talking.

My grandmother would gently try to steer the conversation to something more neutral, like the latest goings-on on "Days of Our Lives" (our favorite soap which we watched together whenever we could). But Granddaddy, grinning mischievously, would say one more thing about the "wonderful" things that fine man Jesse Helms had done for our state, and I'd be unable to refuse the bait.

For the rest of his life -- sixteen more years, about -- Granddaddy and I talked politics. We always came down on opposite sides, always. As I got older, my ability to articulate my positions grew, and my experience allowed me to talk about issues of social justice and the failure of the free market in such areas as healthcare and education, without merely resorting to talking points. I give my Granddaddy credit for this -- he always pushed me to explain my positions, and he didn't let me get away with intellectual laziness. And, almost always, there was that little mischievous smirk, that sparkle in his eye, that let everyone else know that he was having a great deal of fun at my expense.

For most of my adult life, I knew, the same way that I knew I had blue eyes, that Granddaddy and I were practically polar opposites, politically. And I knew, just as profoundly, that it didn't really matter. We loved each other, we enjoyed our debates, and, though I always suspected he wanted me to change my views, I never felt coerced into pretending to think anything I didn't actually believe. He taught me that people of good will can disagree on fundamental issues without sinking to the level of ad hominem attacks and without damaging relationships.

When I visited him for the last time, the primaries for the current election were just beginning. Granddaddy sat in his tiny assisted-living facility room, unable to care for himself after a serious car accident. He had a blanket over his knees and a carton of Food Lion butter pecan ice cream in his hand. He was watching the news, and, as it has been for two years now, the focus was on the election.

Conversation had faltered -- we'd been over how he liked the latest Grisham book-on-tape I'd gotten him for Christmas and how I was doing up in Boston. He looked so weak, so frail. My mom had told me about his failing memory, his lapses into a frightening fantasy world, and I was grateful that he knew me and that we'd had as much conversation as we had. The silence grew longer until I asked, gesturing at the television, "So, who would you like to see for President?"

"Well," he said, taking a bite of ice cream. "I think I'd like to see Obama elected."

I inhaled sharply. "Me, too," I said. "I'd really like to see him as my President." I was astounded. We agreed? On politics? My grandfather, the Jesse Helms supporter?

A hint of his grin returned. "Not Hillary?"

I laughed. "We had eight years of a Clinton -- I'd like to see somebody new." I grinned back. "Hillary would be fine, though."

"I just don't see anybody else in there that's worth anything, on either side," he said. He went on to tell me about Giuliani and McCain and Romney. And, of course, Hillary Clinton who he still despised.

Like many people throughout the country, Granddaddy's faith in the Republican party was destroyed by President Bush, but I don't know that he was ever a straight-party Republican voter. He really did, I realized, evaluate the candidates on their merits, not on their party. With Obama, I think he saw the chance for intelligence and thoughtfulness and moderation to return to our government.

Many people disagree with Obama on policy issues, but even early in the campaign, Obama let it be known that it was okay for people of good will to disagree with him. As a country, we'll work it out. Together. Would that more people, in and out of politics, feel the same.

So, on the 4th of November, I'll be casting my vote for Obama, the first African-American to nominee of a major party. A man who I greatly admire, and whose policies, while more centrist than my own leftist ideology, I mostly support. I wish Granddaddy was still here, so we could, finally, be on the same side.
< The economies | October 26,2008 >
Election Day | 160 comments (160 topical, 0 hidden) | Trackback
Great story by georgeha (4.00 / 1) #1 Sun Oct 26, 2008 at 04:44:47 PM EST
crosspost to dailykos, too.




Thanks. by toxicfur (2.00 / 0) #2 Sun Oct 26, 2008 at 05:00:52 PM EST
Interesting idea about DailyKos. Unfortunately, I didn't have an account there, and I'd have to wait a week to post anything.

--
To Rollins lesbians are like cuddly pandas: cute, exotic, forest-dwelling, dangerous when riled and unable to produce offspring without assistance.-CRwM
[ Parent ]

I already voted by iGrrrl (4.00 / 1) #3 Sun Oct 26, 2008 at 05:28:24 PM EST
 So it feels weird, but good.

Thanks for writing this.

"I don't have time for martial law, I have to get to the gym!" zarathus


If it's got to be weird... by toxicfur (2.00 / 0) #8 Mon Oct 27, 2008 at 02:54:18 AM EST
at least it's good-weird. I didn't have a good reason to vote early, so I still have a week. It's going to be a stressful week, I think.

--
To Rollins lesbians are like cuddly pandas: cute, exotic, forest-dwelling, dangerous when riled and unable to produce offspring without assistance.-CRwM
[ Parent ]

V2FP. by Scrymarch (4.00 / 1) #4 Sun Oct 26, 2008 at 07:34:10 PM EST


The Political Science Department of the University of Woolloomooloo



thank you. by aphrael (4.00 / 3) #5 Sun Oct 26, 2008 at 07:47:29 PM EST
it is easy to forget that disagreement can bring us together, when done correctly, rather than driving us apart.

hug
If television is a babysitter, the internet is a drunk librarian who won't shut up.


One regret I have by toxicfur (4.00 / 1) #9 Mon Oct 27, 2008 at 02:58:16 AM EST
is that I didn't know how nuanced my grandfather's political positions were before he died (after he died, I learned a lot about the amazing things he quietly did for people). I got a glimpse that last visit, but I just didn't hear it prior, I think. I was too young, and too naive and too sure of myself in a lot of ways. He taught me a lot, though, about how to respectfully disagree.

Thanks for the hug.

--
To Rollins lesbians are like cuddly pandas: cute, exotic, forest-dwelling, dangerous when riled and unable to produce offspring without assistance.-CRwM
[ Parent ]

Truth be told . . . by ammoniacal (4.00 / 1) #6 Sun Oct 26, 2008 at 07:58:44 PM EST
I hate the thought of voting for the Marxist, and I dread the dirty looks I'll get on the bus ride to work, but I'm more concerned about voting in 4 years of Bush Lite.

It was an unholy union of text and pulped wood that the Ancients used to distribute their blogs.


why will you get dirty looks? by aphrael (4.00 / 1) #7 Sun Oct 26, 2008 at 08:35:14 PM EST
the other people on the bus shouldn't know who you voted for.
If television is a babysitter, the internet is a drunk librarian who won't shut up.
[ Parent ]

I don't know how to put this delicately. by ammoniacal (2.00 / 0) #14 Mon Oct 27, 2008 at 04:16:48 AM EST
Black people around here seem REALLY emotionally-invested in this election.
OTOH, I suspect they'll be REALLY angry should Obama lose, so I don't see a winning scenario with either outcome.

It was an unholy union of text and pulped wood that the Ancients used to distribute their blogs.
[ Parent ]

I always say... by toxicfur (2.00 / 0) #10 Mon Oct 27, 2008 at 03:00:15 AM EST
people should vote their conscience. If your conscience is saying that the stain on your soul of voting for McCain will be visible to your fellow bus riders, then I think you know what to do.

--
To Rollins lesbians are like cuddly pandas: cute, exotic, forest-dwelling, dangerous when riled and unable to produce offspring without assistance.-CRwM
[ Parent ]

That's the normal stain on his soul by garlic (2.00 / 0) #66 Mon Oct 27, 2008 at 10:51:34 AM EST

Suck it
[ Parent ]

Palin's seems to have done for McCain by jump the ladder (4.00 / 1) #11 Mon Oct 27, 2008 at 03:23:50 AM EST
Plus the campaign has been really dirty. Can anyone sane actual vote Republican?

Of course I'm not an US citizen so what seems mildly social democratic policies from Obama seems like Islamo-Fascist-Communism to some over there.



To quote herbert by Merekat (4.00 / 1) #12 Mon Oct 27, 2008 at 03:28:14 AM EST
Fear is the mind-killer.
Though there are more than a few voting for Obama, as well as others against him on that same basis.


[ Parent ]

rhetoric by ucblockhead (4.00 / 2) #37 Mon Oct 27, 2008 at 06:29:16 AM EST
A lot of the heightened rhetoric is coming from certain groups on the right wing that are looking at being completely out of power for a long time, and are not much liking it.
---
[ucblockhead is] useless and subhuman
[ Parent ]

bullshit bull shit bullshit by sasquatchan (3.25 / 4) #13 Mon Oct 27, 2008 at 03:36:40 AM EST
I'm tired of the "most important election" crap.

Folks, do you vote for alderman ? City council ? The school board ?

Who makes the more 'glaring' headlines ? When some yokel who gets maybe 2% of the registered vote becomes the  new school board member that then implements some wackjob conservative program to get evolution out of the ciriculum and ban "heather has two mommies" from the library ?

So where the heck are all the LIEbrals when those elections  happen ? Staying home and not voting, or not bothering to learn about who is running, because it's not some important election.

Get over it. I want to scream at all the college kids canvassing my neighborhood babbling that same crap about how important this election is. Bullshit. Every election is important. Do you think Obama will be the best thing since sliced bread ? Great, But who has a much bigger, and more local, pull on what's going to effect your life ? Those local elections folks with the "most important election" mindset pay no attention to and never vote in.






rate me down, but then you still don't get it by sasquatchan (4.00 / 1) #17 Mon Oct 27, 2008 at 04:46:08 AM EST
spend a few minutes to think of is this way.

How do folks get up to running for pres ? Generally, they run for some local office (or have lots of involvement in the local community).. Then, they try to run for state office, or Congress, depending on openings (who died, resigned, went to jail, or moved up to a higher office). They tend to first run somewhere where the election is still fairly local.

After establishing themselves for some period of time X, run for larger office (Senate, US Pres).

SO, yes, bull shit. It's those little elections where the turn out is often a joke, where most voters don't know jack shit about the folks running for those little offices, where many, many people, cranks, LIEbrals, whack job conservatives all get their start.

With out a foot in the door, they'd all still be community organizers and cranks that write goofy political letters to the editor in your local paper.
 



[ Parent ]

LIEbrals? by Merekat (2.00 / 0) #18 Mon Oct 27, 2008 at 04:56:43 AM EST
Do you write Micro$oft too?


[ Parent ]

Both of your commenst were idiotic, however by Clipper Ship (1.50 / 2) #19 Mon Oct 27, 2008 at 05:03:49 AM EST
I had to mod them up because I find it encouraging to FINALLY see someone dispute something here for once. The policy of 'If you have nothing nice to say don't say it' is outmoded and stupid.

I would, however, probably vote for Obama if I were an American. Just fer kicks.

---------------

Destroy All Planets
[ Parent ]

Really? by MostlyHarmless (4.00 / 4) #43 Mon Oct 27, 2008 at 07:37:05 AM EST
I think you mistake antagonism for argument.

Like sex and love, many believe that one mustn't exist without the other, and others mistake the former for the latter. Yet they are separate things.

Seriously, if you've never seen people dispute things here, you must be getting the Reader's Digest version of the site. Some of the best content here is in the threads where two people are arguing. lm on religion and ethics, aphrael on politics, cam governmental architecture (Westminster, FTW), all articulate, all thoughtful, and all willing to back their points up.

Maybe your kind of discussion requires it to end in black eyes and bloody noses; whatever turns your crank. Just because you don't find that here doesn't mean disputes and arguments don't exist.

-mh
--
[Mostly Harmless]
[ Parent ]

No, you've got it pretty backwards. by Clipper Ship (1.00 / 1) #81 Mon Oct 27, 2008 at 04:05:49 PM EST
Being fake and not saying things is not argument. I see a lot of that. I rarely see anyone say what they mean. I do see a lot of long-winded, apologetic responses, but very few terse, to-the-point corrections. Mostly, it's people trying to sound above-it-all, I find.

---------------

Destroy All Planets
[ Parent ]

which of us are being fake? by aphrael (2.00 / 0) #86 Mon Oct 27, 2008 at 04:56:34 PM EST
when i argue politics with my friends, i want to be friendly and ncie to them, even when i think they're being dumb.
If television is a babysitter, the internet is a drunk librarian who won't shut up.
[ Parent ]

You mean like Nader and Perot? by ad hoc (4.00 / 2) #23 Mon Oct 27, 2008 at 05:14:50 AM EST
I vote in local elections. by aphrael (4.00 / 1) #39 Mon Oct 27, 2008 at 06:41:11 AM EST
But I don't think they're more important than this election.

This election the voters of my state are voting on whether or not my marriage can be recognized by the state.

That makes this the most important election I've voted in.
If television is a babysitter, the internet is a drunk librarian who won't shut up.
[ Parent ]

OK, so if this were an off year by sasquatchan (2.00 / 0) #45 Mon Oct 27, 2008 at 07:58:57 AM EST
election, with out stupid "ban gay marriage" ballot issue (that's a strong personal issue for you), and was just local water board, soil&conservation, school board folks running, would you have voted ?

For too many of the population, that answer is no. And that is what angers me, because it's that same population that's ringing the bells about how important this election is. Your bigger choices tend to come from those smaller elections.


[ Parent ]

Your mileage may very by ucblockhead (4.00 / 2) #52 Mon Oct 27, 2008 at 09:01:34 AM EST
for some of us, the local elections aren't all that important because we're fairly satisfied with who is in.  I always vote, of course, but given that my city has run a surplus since forever, was remodeling parks when other cities were going bankrupt, and has a city council that is moderate, civic minded, and just in general decent, there's not much to get worked up about where I live.  Creationist loons don't tend to get much traction for school board around my area.

I'd dearly love to vote out Feinstein of course, but the Republicans insist on only running people who are worse.  But Boxer is ok, and my representative, Tauscher, is in a rock-safe seat and pretty reasonable.

I don't know about where you are, but where I am, this sure as hell is a bigger election than "normal".  The presidency has certainly had a pretty severe negative effect on me and mine and there's a pretty important proposition to vote on even for those of us who are not gay.

But I do understand why those on the right don't want to see this election as the sea change that it may well represent as admitting that would be admitting to being on the wrong end of a large-scale political change in direction.  I guess you get to find out what it was like to be a "LIEberal" in 1980.
---
[ucblockhead is] useless and subhuman
[ Parent ]

people who are worse by aphrael (2.00 / 0) #54 Mon Oct 27, 2008 at 09:11:32 AM EST
What?

In 2000, the Republicans ran liberal Congressman Tom Campbell - who has come out against Prop 8, something Feinstein will not do - against Feinstein. The man was a fiscal conservative and social liberal, probably the closest thing we've had to an actual libertarian candidate for statewide office in my lifetime.

He lost.

If television is a babysitter, the internet is a drunk librarian who won't shut up.
[ Parent ]

Oh yeah... by ucblockhead (2.00 / 0) #61 Mon Oct 27, 2008 at 09:48:48 AM EST
I think I voted for him.  :-)
---
[ucblockhead is] useless and subhuman
[ Parent ]

The 80s by sasquatchan (2.00 / 0) #57 Mon Oct 27, 2008 at 09:23:50 AM EST
Weren't there lots of long polemics about Regan democrats ?

I split tickets far too often to be placed on the right or the left. Both, maybe. However, around places that are way out there lefty like mefi, I'd look like Stalin to them. Or to run of the mill kooks like kos or freepers both would shoot me for being on the other side.


[ Parent ]

yes. by aphrael (4.00 / 2) #53 Mon Oct 27, 2008 at 09:09:51 AM EST
in fact, i would be spending the day in a polling place handing out ballots, just like I do in every election.

:)

If television is a babysitter, the internet is a drunk librarian who won't shut up.
[ Parent ]

we need more folks like you by sasquatchan (2.00 / 0) #55 Mon Oct 27, 2008 at 09:19:54 AM EST
;)


[ Parent ]

I tried to do that this election by garlic (2.00 / 0) #68 Mon Oct 27, 2008 at 10:57:26 AM EST
but our part time township office didn't seem to understand what I was asking, and referred me to the part time democratic party township office who didn't call me back.

Suck it
[ Parent ]

I used to do that by ad hoc (2.00 / 0) #104 Tue Oct 28, 2008 at 08:09:55 AM EST
but I got so fed up with the police abuse of the voters, that I was afraid I wouldn't be able to keep from speaking up and then getting myself arrested.

--
The three things that make a diamond also make a waffle.
[ Parent ]

police abuse of the voters? by aphrael (2.00 / 0) #115 Tue Oct 28, 2008 at 10:49:52 AM EST
True. by ad hoc (2.00 / 0) #116 Tue Oct 28, 2008 at 10:52:08 AM EST
you missed my meaning. by aphrael (2.00 / 0) #122 Tue Oct 28, 2008 at 12:33:10 PM EST
What I'm talking about by ad hoc (2.00 / 0) #129 Tue Oct 28, 2008 at 02:42:05 PM EST
is the verbal abuse of voters by the police at the polling place. In Mass (or at least in Boston) there has to be at least one uniformed officer at each polling location. Every time I've worked at the poll, the cop that sat next to me was treating the voters with some pretty appalling contempt, telling the voters they were stupid and to shut up and behave when all they were doing was asking how this process worked. I called one of them on it and he got really aggressive and said "what are you, a fucking cop hater?" at the top of his voice. That was the last time I worked.

--
The three things that make a diamond also make a waffle.
[ Parent ]

So let me get this straight . . . by slozo (2.00 / 1) #50 Mon Oct 27, 2008 at 08:57:47 AM EST
. . . you think the issue of whether or not your marriage to another man will be state recognised is more important than the issue of, say, more wars in the middle east? Health care? Don't those issues have actual human lives at stake - some of them even really important American lives? Heck, even the economy will have direct life/death impact for many.

I think you've got your priorities mixed up, or misstated.

[ Parent ]

globally, no. by aphrael (4.00 / 1) #56 Mon Oct 27, 2008 at 09:21:02 AM EST
but there's a very strong distinction between "most important thing to me right now" and "most important thing to the world", and I think most people are capable of drawing it.
If television is a babysitter, the internet is a drunk librarian who won't shut up.
[ Parent ]

Simple by MostlyHarmless (4.00 / 3) #58 Mon Oct 27, 2008 at 09:35:59 AM EST
The issue of gay marriage boils down to: are gay people equal members of society? or more pointedly, do we still allow bigotry in our society?

This isn't some little esoteric local issue like whether there should be a left turn bay at 12th and Victoria, or even whether or not we should've built the RAV line. This is a fundamental ethical question society is grappling with here. aphrael is particularly affected by this debate, as the outcome determines how he and his husband are viewed by his country and government, but the personal nature of the issue to him doesn't detract from its importance.

Wars, the economy, healthcare - all are important matters relating to the practical running of the government. The ethical issues like Rights don't have the immediate and obvious effects like the practical ones do, but do not make the mistake of underestimating their importance or their impact.

-mh
--
[Mostly Harmless]
[ Parent ]

"Our society"? by ammoniacal (2.00 / 0) #88 Mon Oct 27, 2008 at 06:37:13 PM EST
Was that the sound of you surrendering your former Canadian autonomy? I think it was!

It was an unholy union of text and pulped wood that the Ancients used to distribute their blogs.
[ Parent ]

I disagree with you . . . by slozo (2.00 / 0) #92 Tue Oct 28, 2008 at 04:44:52 AM EST
. . . on what I think gay marriage boils down to. For me, it has nothing to do with being equal members of society - that's covered well under existing american laws, as far as I know. If not in practice, anyone who is a different religion, race or sexual denomination already has equal standing as a member of society.

I really don't think it is even in the same ballpark in terms of importance when compared to the continuation of war (see: killing lots of people) for corporate gain. Isn't the right to live more important to defend than the right to a legally recognised marriage?  

[ Parent ]

easy for you to say by ucblockhead (2.00 / 0) #96 Tue Oct 28, 2008 at 06:35:43 AM EST
As a straight white male who would be uneffected.
---
[ucblockhead is] useless and subhuman
[ Parent ]

really? by aphrael (2.00 / 0) #97 Tue Oct 28, 2008 at 06:36:01 AM EST
there's no law in the US which prohibits discrimination on the basis of sexual orientation.
If television is a babysitter, the internet is a drunk librarian who won't shut up.
[ Parent ]

Hunh, I guess . . . by slozo (2.00 / 0) #111 Tue Oct 28, 2008 at 09:37:05 AM EST

. . . I will have to take your word for that as a law student. Fair enough, didn't know that.



[ Parent ]

a handful of states have such rules by aphrael (2.00 / 0) #114 Tue Oct 28, 2008 at 10:19:36 AM EST
I think California in effect has one now. But that's pretty unusual.
If television is a babysitter, the internet is a drunk librarian who won't shut up.
[ Parent ]

it's okay, by infinitera (2.00 / 0) #120 Tue Oct 28, 2008 at 11:46:08 AM EST
we all wish we had Canada's Charter.

[…] a professional layabout. Which I aspire to be, but am not yet. — CheeseburgerBrown
[ Parent ]

if they're equal by MostlyHarmless (2.00 / 0) #106 Tue Oct 28, 2008 at 08:11:52 AM EST
how come they can't get married? If they're equal, why is there even a question as to if they can get married?

Is it the MOST IMPORTANT ISSUE EVAR!!!? of course not, but this is more than "can they get married", this is "do we as a society give these people equal standing". Right now in the States, they don't.

-mh
--
[Mostly Harmless]
[ Parent ]

You are misinformed. by ad hoc (2.00 / 0) #107 Tue Oct 28, 2008 at 08:11:56 AM EST
Or uninformed.

I'm not sure which.

--
The three things that make a diamond also make a waffle.
[ Parent ]

Intentionally by toxicfur (2.00 / 0) #109 Tue Oct 28, 2008 at 08:17:42 AM EST
misrepresenting the facts and oversimplifying complexities would be my guess.

--
To Rollins lesbians are like cuddly pandas: cute, exotic, forest-dwelling, dangerous when riled and unable to produce offspring without assistance.-CRwM
[ Parent ]

also by aphrael (4.00 / 1) #59 Mon Oct 27, 2008 at 09:46:43 AM EST
it goes deeper than whether my marriage will be recognized.

on some level, this is about the voters of the state deciding whether or not they agree that I have equal rights to those enjoyed by the majority; whether I am a full citizen, or merely someone suffered tolerance but not entitled to the same protection of the law as everyone else.
If television is a babysitter, the internet is a drunk librarian who won't shut up.
[ Parent ]

Rights vs. Health care by ucblockhead (2.00 / 0) #73 Mon Oct 27, 2008 at 12:39:13 PM EST
"Give me Liberty or give me Death".
---
[ucblockhead is] useless and subhuman
[ Parent ]

Right to Marriage . . . by slozo (2.00 / 0) #93 Tue Oct 28, 2008 at 04:52:08 AM EST
. . . vs. Right to Live in Another Country and Not Get Killed by American Soldiers Who Label Anything Killed by Them as Terrorist:

"Let me live, spare my children."

[ Parent ]

So by ucblockhead (4.00 / 1) #95 Tue Oct 28, 2008 at 06:30:16 AM EST
You would have told Martin Luther King that he should stop wasting his breath on civil rights and instead protest Vietnam?
---
[ucblockhead is] useless and subhuman
[ Parent ]

Actually, King was already . . . by slozo (2.00 / 0) #110 Tue Oct 28, 2008 at 09:33:12 AM EST
. . . protesting against Vietnam, and was becoming a much larger political force for peace in general. His was a righteous battle.

So, what would you tell the surviving family members of innocents killed in Afghanistan about your voting strategy? I'd like to see you try and explain that one . . .

[ Parent ]

I will remember that by ucblockhead (4.00 / 2) #117 Tue Oct 28, 2008 at 11:21:29 AM EST
When the "ban gay marriage and pull out of Afghanistan" bill appears.

King was marching for civil rights first, very clearly.  By your argument, he should have put his desire for civil rights at the back of the bus.

Would you be so sure of your priorities if this proposition was about banning miscegenation?  Or are you only willing to take your high moral stance when it is other people's rights that are in question?

(Or are you just a homophobe?)
---
[ucblockhead is] useless and subhuman
[ Parent ]

I was waiting for how long . . . by slozo (2.00 / 0) #136 Wed Oct 29, 2008 at 03:40:35 AM EST
. . . it would take you to call me a homophobe. Only two comments, not bad. I suppose if I disagreed with you about immigration I'd be racist, or if I criticized Israel I'd be anti-semetic. Whatever cardboard cut-out fits, right?

I think that a country's political stance on war/genocide is more important than their policy on gay marriage.

Period.


 


[ Parent ]

Yes, you've made that clear by ucblockhead (2.00 / 0) #138 Wed Oct 29, 2008 at 04:05:19 AM EST
I think what a lot of us don't get is why you think the issues are related.
---
[ucblockhead is] useless and subhuman
[ Parent ]

If you read what I wrote . . . by slozo (2.00 / 0) #143 Wed Oct 29, 2008 at 05:15:36 AM EST
. . . it is clear that I am saying that IMO, one issue is more important than the other.

The only way those two issues are related would be if you are a gay man and want to get married while enlisted, I suppose. And the fact that they are both election issues.

[ Parent ]

So by ucblockhead (2.00 / 0) #149 Wed Oct 29, 2008 at 06:28:57 AM EST
Why are you telling people to stop worrying about the impending gay marriage ban in California, if it is completely unrelated to the thing you say is more important?
---
[ucblockhead is] useless and subhuman
[ Parent ]

I wasn't. (nt) by slozo (2.00 / 0) #152 Wed Oct 29, 2008 at 09:13:31 AM EST


[ Parent ]

BTW by ucblockhead (2.00 / 0) #139 Wed Oct 29, 2008 at 04:16:44 AM EST
This isn't like "disagreeing on immigration".  This is like telling Martin Luther King to stop whining about civil rights because kids are dying in Vietnam is more important.  And you're damn right I'd call you a racist if you did that.

I'll ask you this again: Suppose your country was voting to ban miscegenation while at war in Afghanistan.  Would you be here telling us that it was much more important to stop the war then worry about the rights of people to marry outside their race?

Are you going to duck that question again?
---
[ucblockhead is] useless and subhuman
[ Parent ]

Well, I disgree . . . by slozo (2.00 / 0) #145 Wed Oct 29, 2008 at 05:40:39 AM EST

. . . with your "btw" comment. I really don't think there's much more to add to the discussion, as you continue to compare apples to oranges.

If my country was voting on banning miscegenation . . . I would probably be living in another country already, as I wouldn't have been able to marry my wife in a safe environment for us and our future children. It wouldn't change the fact that I have always been against the war in Afghanistan. And yes, I would still think that a war of aggression supercedes marriage law. 

So please tell me: why do you think the policy of gay marriage is more important than the death and destruction your country is bringing to others internationally?



[ Parent ]

So the war in Afghanistan is a war of aggression? by lm (4.00 / 2) #148 Wed Oct 29, 2008 at 06:05:47 AM EST
Regardless, it seems to me that you're now saying that your marriage is more important to you than staying within the country to vote on the war. If you'd rather move and remain married than stick around to vote against the war, your priorities are clear. Marriage is more important than stopping the war.

There is no more degenerate kind of state than that in which the richest are supposed to be the best.
Cicero, The Republic
[ Parent ]

seriously. by garlic (2.00 / 0) #153 Wed Oct 29, 2008 at 09:19:21 AM EST
afghanistan initially seemed as close as you could get to a just war.

Suck it
[ Parent ]

Rights are fundamental by ucblockhead (2.00 / 0) #150 Wed Oct 29, 2008 at 06:34:38 AM EST
And laws concerning rights last long beyond wars.


But it is a false dichotomy.  The one has nothing to do with the other so which is "more important" is completely irrelevant except as a tool to try to keep people quiet about rights.  Perhaps that is not your intent...
---
[ucblockhead is] useless and subhuman
[ Parent ]

lucky for us Americans, by garlic (2.00 / 0) #103 Tue Oct 28, 2008 at 08:07:44 AM EST
we get to vote about US lives, and we don't have to care about dirty foreigners lives.

Suck it
[ Parent ]

So you're saying by ad hoc (2.00 / 0) #108 Tue Oct 28, 2008 at 08:14:19 AM EST
people can only do one thing at a time?

--
The three things that make a diamond also make a waffle.
[ Parent ]

Well, judging by american attention spans . . . by slozo (2.00 / 0) #113 Tue Oct 28, 2008 at 09:43:44 AM EST
. . . and the portrayal of "real issues" by the MSM, I would say maybe two, three at the most.

So you're saying gay marriage is more important than, say, invading another country and killing hundreds of thousands of people?

[ Parent ]

You should be more careful by ad hoc (2.00 / 0) #119 Tue Oct 28, 2008 at 11:46:07 AM EST
about offering opinions on topics you know nothing about.

--
The three things that make a diamond also make a waffle.
[ Parent ]

it's the internet by garlic (2.00 / 0) #123 Tue Oct 28, 2008 at 12:59:41 PM EST
this is an unreasonable request. Even though it would be nice if slozo knew what he was talking about occasionally.

Suck it
[ Parent ]

point taken. by ad hoc (2.00 / 0) #131 Tue Oct 28, 2008 at 02:43:20 PM EST
but it was only advice. He's free to ignore it, as I'm sure he will.

--
The three things that make a diamond also make a waffle.
[ Parent ]

Why should I . . . by slozo (2.00 / 0) #137 Wed Oct 29, 2008 at 03:52:56 AM EST
. . . be more careful? Please, enlighten me. 

[ Parent ]

Because by ucblockhead (2.00 / 0) #140 Wed Oct 29, 2008 at 04:21:24 AM EST
You have a history of being spectacularly wrong.
---
[ucblockhead is] useless and subhuman
[ Parent ]

If you don't get my style now . . . by slozo (2.00 / 0) #142 Wed Oct 29, 2008 at 05:01:33 AM EST
. . . you never will. Heck, I even use the word troll in the biline of that diary!

[ Parent ]

To save yourself embarassment. by ad hoc (2.00 / 0) #144 Wed Oct 29, 2008 at 05:28:05 AM EST
Ah! So it was altruistic in intent . . . by slozo (2.00 / 0) #146 Wed Oct 29, 2008 at 05:45:13 AM EST
. . . whew! For a second there, I thought you were trying to socially bully me into silence for having a different opinion . . .

[ Parent ]

See? by ad hoc (4.00 / 1) #147 Wed Oct 29, 2008 at 05:57:40 AM EST
I'm an American and can be concerned about more than on thing at the same time.

Time to refactor your outlook.

--
The three things that make a diamond also make a waffle.
[ Parent ]

To avoid pissing people off by ambrosen (2.00 / 0) #159 Wed Nov 12, 2008 at 09:03:45 AM EST
with your errant nonsense.

[ Parent ]

Too bad then . . . by slozo (2.00 / 0) #160 Thu Nov 13, 2008 at 09:07:58 AM EST
. . . being politically correct is not any kind of fear motivator for me to express my opinions.

[ Parent ]

It's almost like you don't know any Americans. by toxicfur (2.00 / 0) #121 Tue Oct 28, 2008 at 11:51:29 AM EST
Geez. I sincerely hope you're being sarcastic. If not, then I have to suppose that all you know about Americans you get from Fox news, sitcoms and soap operas.

--
To Rollins lesbians are like cuddly pandas: cute, exotic, forest-dwelling, dangerous when riled and unable to produce offspring without assistance.-CRwM
[ Parent ]

Don't forget by ucblockhead (2.00 / 0) #128 Tue Oct 28, 2008 at 02:02:59 PM EST
He was convinced that Hillary was going to steal the nomination and called us all naive idiots for believing otherwise.
---
[ucblockhead is] useless and subhuman
[ Parent ]

I was being sarcastic . . . by slozo (2.00 / 0) #141 Wed Oct 29, 2008 at 04:53:06 AM EST
. . . I don't watch TV, don't have cable. Haven't watched north american cable tv for over 3 years now, closest I get is the occasional humorous utube clip.

I also know that most people only regurgitate the sound bytes that they have heard and read. What the public may have viewed as an important issue is easily subjugated, lessened and manipulated in favour of what the corporate media would like the important issues to be. Trust me, Canadians are not very different at all in this way.

Classic example: Last provincial election for Ontario, there was an initial interest by the public about a few key issues, namely public health care becoming more privatised, transportation subsidies and plans, environmental (green) issues. All were swept aside by election's end with the burning issue of "catholic school subsidies", which was made more controversial with a tory flip-flop at the end. It hogged up all the press coverage . . . meanwhile, public transportation remains elusive and expensive for those in the greater Toronto area, emergency room wait times are often many hours long, and toxic waste continues to be dumped unfettered in Ontario drinking water.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2007_Ontario_Election

When I talked about the election with others, the first and only issue mentioned by almost all was the catholic school funding.  People were often surprised at my insolence for caring about clean water, transportation and emergency room wait times. The public perception of what is important is quite easily controlled in my opinion, and using obvious propoganda outlets such as FOX News as examples is merely representative of a far more comprehensive and interwoven system of programming.



[ Parent ]

Amusing by ucblockhead (2.00 / 0) #151 Wed Oct 29, 2008 at 06:44:52 AM EST
It is amusing watching you complain that the average voter doesn't care about what you care about in a diary where you spent most of the time telling others their issues weren't important.
---
[ucblockhead is] useless and subhuman
[ Parent ]

how do you know? by garlic (2.00 / 0) #154 Wed Oct 29, 2008 at 09:23:07 AM EST
How can you tell they are regurgitating if you have no reference to what they've heard and read?

Also, what's with the wikipedia link when you denegrated wikipedia as a source a few posts ago?

I don't know the people you've talked to, but I do know how you present yourself here. And here you're put down for your denegration of the topic at hand, and of the people in the discussion, not because you are concerned about innocents getting killed.

Suck it
[ Parent ]

One can tell that a person is repeating . . . by slozo (2.00 / 0) #156 Thu Oct 30, 2008 at 02:49:14 AM EST
. . . talking points because media isn't just made up of television broadcasts that I may not have seen or heard.  But even in the absence of any media, some talking points are inherently obvious as statements that have not been thought of independently by the speaker . . . use of specific terms and their usual vocabulary range; phrasing; not being able to explain the logical reason behind their assertion; etc. Of course, it helps to know the speaker somewhat, and the true test is actually discussing the point beyond a quick line or two.

What's with you trying to discuss, rather than make a personal attack? 

[ Parent ]

There is a clear distinction by lm (2.00 / 0) #101 Tue Oct 28, 2008 at 07:43:23 AM EST
One of those issues is an issue about human nature itself, not only who has the full rights of a citizen but who is fully human in the eyes of the law.

The other issues are all disagreements about how best to approach this or that challenge. No one really disagrees that more people need health care and that the economy needs to be chugging along on all cylinders. Rather the disagreements are over specific methods towards those ends.


There is no more degenerate kind of state than that in which the richest are supposed to be the best.
Cicero, The Republic
[ Parent ]

Those other issues by ad hoc (2.00 / 0) #105 Tue Oct 28, 2008 at 08:10:31 AM EST
And finally . . . by slozo (2.00 / 0) #112 Tue Oct 28, 2008 at 09:38:28 AM EST
. . . someone gets the point.

[ Parent ]

You're making no sense. by ad hoc (2.00 / 0) #118 Tue Oct 28, 2008 at 11:45:55 AM EST
America the country by garlic (2.00 / 0) #124 Tue Oct 28, 2008 at 01:00:50 PM EST
is a bunch of killers, and we the people aren't trying to stop that sufficiently for slozo.

Suck it
[ Parent ]

I vote in local elections by georgeha (4.00 / 1) #20 Mon Oct 27, 2008 at 05:09:03 AM EST
and can't wait to vote against our current county supervisor.


[ Parent ]

I had to go to work, so didn't have time to respon by toxicfur (4.00 / 3) #21 Mon Oct 27, 2008 at 05:12:03 AM EST
d. This is the why I rated you down -- I wrote a diary about civil disagreement, and you decided to use inflammatory language that only served to alienate me and anyone else who doesn't already agree with you. Intellectually lazy "shortcuts" like "LIEberal" (and, as it happens, "McSame") really fucking irritate me.

I absolutely agree that voting in local elections is important and may have more impact on day-to-day lives than who is President, but here are three reasons why I think this election is the most important one to date that I will vote in:
  1. The view of the United States throughout the world. Right now, the US's standing in the world is really not good. We wasted a great deal of international good will after 9/11, and we need someone who will help us look better. We need someone who can use diplomacy effectively. This is absolutely crucial for our national security, and I strongly believe that Obama can do that better than McCain.
  2. The Supreme Court of the United States. The next President will have the opportunity to nominate at least one (probably more than one) judge to the Supreme Court. That nomination could have a tremendous effect on our day-to-day lives, in terms of social justice and civil liberties. I do not want to see the Court turn farther to the right than it already is. Those on the right could see this election as the opportunity to turn the court farther to the right, and would likewise see this as a tremendously important election.
  3. People are excited about politics. The fact that you have college kids canvassing your neighborhood should only be seen as a good thing. I don't care who is volunteering, but I do care that people are engaged. We need an electorate that isn't cynical and apathetic. We need people who are willing to get out and make sure people are voting. We need to have this sort of excitement at all levels of government -- including school boards and aldermen. I hope that those running on the local level are leveraging this national-level excitement.
See how I can address your concerns without attacking you? Respectful discourse is so much more civilized.

--
To Rollins lesbians are like cuddly pandas: cute, exotic, forest-dwelling, dangerous when riled and unable to produce offspring without assistance.-CRwM
[ Parent ]

that's crazy talk. by aphrael (4.00 / 2) #40 Mon Oct 27, 2008 at 06:42:17 AM EST
"respectful discourse" is a sign of decadant barbarianism. Here in manly California, we settle our political disputes the old-fashioned way: with gladiators.
If television is a babysitter, the internet is a drunk librarian who won't shut up.
[ Parent ]

so that's how schwarzeneggar won... by garlic (2.00 / 0) #69 Mon Oct 27, 2008 at 11:00:48 AM EST
man, that's a hard name to spell.

Suck it
[ Parent ]

Yeah by ucblockhead (2.00 / 0) #74 Mon Oct 27, 2008 at 12:41:00 PM EST
He totally kicked Gary Coleman's ass for the crown.
---
[ucblockhead is] useless and subhuman
[ Parent ]

FWIW, by sasquatchan (2.00 / 0) #44 Mon Oct 27, 2008 at 07:54:48 AM EST
I've been using "lazy shortcuts" since ~2002 ?  Mostly from Bob imitating talk-radio (i-RAQ, algore, LIEbrals, etc). It's a pattern that I didn't drop for this year's talk either..Sarcasm like that doesn't translate well in political posts.

What angers me is that everyone's focused on this one election, and come off year, or congressional, or state/local primaries and elections, these same folks are nowhere to be found.

They don't get that the choices they see in the "big elections" have to come from somewhere. And that somewhere is the boring local/regional elections. The ones they don't vote in.

Sure, some states have crappy primary laws that make voting in party-run primaries a pain, but you've got to particiapte at all levels.

(Ok, point taken on Perot, but I don't give points for Nader, Ad Hoc. Perot had enough $ to try, but how often are there other 3rd party candidates that take in a notable percentage of votes in the past 10-15 presidential elections, that also "came out of nowhere" [ie no political establishment] ?)


[ Parent ]

Thanks for clarifying. by toxicfur (4.00 / 1) #46 Mon Oct 27, 2008 at 08:00:09 AM EST
The tone of your original post seriously hit me the wrong way, even though I agree with its underlying message. People do need to get involved and stay involved. I'd love to see the infrastructure that was built through these campaigns leveraged to do similar kinds of work for local and state elections. I'd love to see people stay engaged on this level. It's up to everybody, though, and if it takes a national election to get people excited about politics, then that's what it takes, and those of us who would like to see more involvement should be grateful for it.

--
To Rollins lesbians are like cuddly pandas: cute, exotic, forest-dwelling, dangerous when riled and unable to produce offspring without assistance.-CRwM
[ Parent ]

I agree by StackyMcRacky (4.00 / 1) #22 Mon Oct 27, 2008 at 05:13:59 AM EST
on the "most important election" stuff.  EVERY election is important, even if it isn't presidential.

sometimes i think people have become too caught up in the media.

[ Parent ]

(Comment Deleted) by wumpus (2.00 / 0) #79 Mon Oct 27, 2008 at 03:42:17 PM EST

This comment has been deleted by wumpus



[ Parent ]

You're completely missing the point by theboz (4.00 / 2) #30 Mon Oct 27, 2008 at 05:57:48 AM EST
It's not the most important election in our lifetimes because of Barack Obama.  While that is the hype that the Republicans want everyone to think it's all about, that's simply not the case.  In fact, I would say that Obama has been pushed to where he is because of the people.  He's riding a wave that started among the rank and file voters, not the Washington elite.  This is why he defeated Clinton.  It wasn't necessarily that his campaign was better, but rather that grassroots efforts organized and rallied around him whether he asked for it or not.

So this is the most important election in our lifetimes.  Why?  Well let's see -- the worst economic crisis since the great depression, the war in Iraq weakening our nation militarily, economically, etc.  We have Palin, a more divisive figure than Bush and potentially the next great evil leader in world history (if she manages to get enough support for a 2012 run.  I hope the American people are smarter than that.)  Climate change is threatening to destroy much of life as we know it.  There are many crisis occurring and many that may appear soon.  It is important, not just because we are picking a president, but because we need to shake things up on all levels, and we are seeing a new movement form that will push our nation in a different direction.  Let's face it -- we have seen the beginning of the end of unrestricted capitalism.  the Bush administration (with Obama and McCain both voting yes) made the biggest socialist move in our government since the New Deal.  We are seeing proof that trickle down economics is a sham, and that deregulation is a sham.  We are seeing that the conservative viewpoint has been wrong on not only the economy but on national security, on education, on everything.

So for me, this is the most important election in my life so far.  Not because of Obama.  I like him, but he's no savior and I will probably have to spend the next four to eight years participating in ways to force him to do what I'd like to see happen.  The theme amongst the right has been that Obama has been made up into a superstar, a messiah, or whatever.  This simply isn't true, and is what Republicans tell themselves so they can sleep at night, since they won't be able to fuck us over and steal our shit as much in a few months.

- - - - -
That's what I always say about you, boz, you have a good memory for random facts about pussy. -- joh3n
[ Parent ]

enough support for a 2012 run by wiredog (2.00 / 0) #62 Mon Oct 27, 2008 at 09:49:21 AM EST
I wouldn't be surprised if she did, she's already positioning herself for it. The real problem with Palin 2012 isn't that she might win, it's that she's guaranteed to lose, and take the Republicans further down with her. A one party democracy in the US is just as bad if that party is the Democrats as it is if that party is the Republicans.

The Republicans are well on their way to being the party of rural white protestants. Mostly in the southeast.

Earth First!
(We can strip mine the rest later.)

[ Parent ]

"most important election" by gzt (4.00 / 1) #48 Mon Oct 27, 2008 at 08:42:16 AM EST
I quite agree. Every presidential election becomes "the most important election". There was a recent article about this: http://www.theamericanscholar.org/au08/election-clausen.html

I mean, c'mon. I will grant that you must live in the here and now, that the present is the only thing that exists. Beyond that, there's little reason to claim this election is the most important. Iraq? That was a problem last election. The economy? We really should've dealt with that last election, not this one, so perhaps the last election was more important, we just didn't realize it in time. Etc etc.

[ Parent ]

Most of the people who read HuSi... by wiredog (2.00 / 0) #63 Mon Oct 27, 2008 at 09:52:47 AM EST
are pretty politically aware. Most of us probably vote in local elections. I've voted in every election from 1984 onwards. By absentee ballot when I was in the Army.

Earth First!
(We can strip mine the rest later.)

[ Parent ]

i will admit by aphrael (2.00 / 0) #65 Mon Oct 27, 2008 at 10:03:41 AM EST
to not voting in student body elections at $city_school. The law school is off in its own little world, I have no contact with the greater student body, and am only ever on the main campus to (a) go to the gym or (b) use the library.

I see no reason to care what the student body governing board does, and less reason why my opinions about things I know nothing about should infect the process.
If television is a babysitter, the internet is a drunk librarian who won't shut up.
[ Parent ]

this is why it's crap by garlic (2.00 / 0) #70 Mon Oct 27, 2008 at 11:15:11 AM EST
that I have to vote to retain judges and/or to elect judges. What the hell do I know about whether these guys have done a good job or will do a good job? I can follow the recommendations of some legal board or another, but that just gives them more power, because they say vote for these and against these, not really why. I hate voting for judges.

Suck it
[ Parent ]

i can see that by aphrael (2.00 / 0) #71 Mon Oct 27, 2008 at 12:03:52 PM EST
but here's the other side:

the california supreme court ruled that the constitution required gay marriage.

lots of people are pissed about that.

should they be able to punish the judges by voting them out of office?
If television is a babysitter, the internet is a drunk librarian who won't shut up.
[ Parent ]

that makes it even worse! by garlic (2.00 / 0) #72 Mon Oct 27, 2008 at 12:19:56 PM EST
how would minorities ever get any protection if the majority can vote out the arbiters of the laws and constitutions saying that they must be given rights?

Suck it
[ Parent ]

instead they vote to take away the rights. by aphrael (2.00 / 0) #75 Mon Oct 27, 2008 at 12:44:49 PM EST
would be much better if they reacted by punishing the judge rather than me.

If television is a babysitter, the internet is a drunk librarian who won't shut up.
[ Parent ]

a judge by garlic (2.00 / 0) #91 Tue Oct 28, 2008 at 02:09:13 AM EST
can still find the law they pass unconstitutional.

I don't know if a judge can find a constitutional amendment unconstitutional.

Suck it
[ Parent ]

Probably not by ucblockhead (2.00 / 0) #98 Tue Oct 28, 2008 at 06:36:34 AM EST
Unless they screwed up in the text somehow.
---
[ucblockhead is] useless and subhuman
[ Parent ]

Actually... by ana (2.00 / 0) #99 Tue Oct 28, 2008 at 06:51:15 AM EST
if a state constitution violates the federal one, it can be ruled unconstitutional. See Romer v. Evans.

"And this ... is a piece of Synergy." --Kellnerin
[ Parent ]

Voting is pointless by dmg (4.00 / 1) #77 Mon Oct 27, 2008 at 03:29:45 PM EST
A reptilian always wins. 
--
How to deal with trolls..
[ Parent ]

except here in california by aphrael (2.00 / 0) #78 Mon Oct 27, 2008 at 03:34:31 PM EST
Chosen by reptilians, no doubt... by dmg (2.00 / 0) #82 Mon Oct 27, 2008 at 04:15:21 PM EST
Yes by ucblockhead (2.00 / 0) #84 Mon Oct 27, 2008 at 04:49:03 PM EST
Which is why it is imperative to vote them down.
---
[ucblockhead is] useless and subhuman
[ Parent ]

not all of them. by aphrael (2.00 / 0) #85 Mon Oct 27, 2008 at 04:55:22 PM EST
the one i care most about was put on the ballot by a million angry citizens.
If television is a babysitter, the internet is a drunk librarian who won't shut up.
[ Parent ]

reptilian ones (nt) by ucblockhead (4.00 / 1) #87 Mon Oct 27, 2008 at 05:04:41 PM EST

---
[ucblockhead is] useless and subhuman
[ Parent ]

Manipulated by reptilian media... by dmg (3.50 / 2) #90 Tue Oct 28, 2008 at 01:46:45 AM EST
The reptilian overlords don't have time to actually do all the manipulation - they rely on us to do most of it ourselves... 
--
How to deal with trolls..
[ Parent ]

"the media" by ucblockhead (2.00 / 0) #94 Tue Oct 28, 2008 at 06:29:27 AM EST
I am pretty sure that the media doesn't want to ban gay marriage.
---
[ucblockhead is] useless and subhuman
[ Parent ]

It wants to create division. Its a diversion. by dmg (2.00 / 0) #125 Tue Oct 28, 2008 at 01:32:33 PM EST
The actual outcome of any vote is not really the point, since votes are never held on anything important, or if they are, the results are ignored.
The main purpose is to get people all stirred up and in conflict with each other, and imagining they have a say in the running of things, when in fact they are slaves to the greater reptilian agenda of global fascism.

Voting is an utterly futile act, and indicates the voter does not "get it" that "democracy" is a smokescreen for something far more sinister.

However, feel free to vote if it makes you feel better. There are worse ways to spend your time.


--
How to deal with trolls..
[ Parent ]

Futile act? by ucblockhead (2.00 / 0) #127 Tue Oct 28, 2008 at 01:59:16 PM EST
If the proposition passes, my gay friends and relatives can't marry.  Otherwise they can.

How is voting on that then "futile"?

I've lived in the state of California for thirty years, and during that time, I've seen propositions that have had a dramatic effect on the state.

I know it is fashionable to pretend votes have no effect, but in my state at least, there's very clear examples of very large scale changes resulting from simple yes/no votes.
---
[ucblockhead is] useless and subhuman
[ Parent ]

Well by dmg (2.00 / 0) #130 Tue Oct 28, 2008 at 02:42:42 PM EST
I'm not pretending votes have no effect, its actually my belief. 
I am sitting right next to a form that requires me to register to vote on pain of a £1000 fine. I have not returned the form.

"Democracy" is bullshit.

So long as people keep on rubber stamping it, it will continue, and our troops will continue dying in Afghanistan for no good reason.



--
How to deal with trolls..
[ Parent ]

I understand you believe it by ucblockhead (2.00 / 0) #133 Tue Oct 28, 2008 at 04:17:10 PM EST
And yet my property tax bill reminds me twice a year that Prop 13 had an effect.
---
[ucblockhead is] useless and subhuman
[ Parent ]

I think what dmg is saying by MostlyHarmless (4.00 / 1) #134 Tue Oct 28, 2008 at 04:25:55 PM EST
is not that propositions, etc. have no effect, but that the Votes cast for a proposition have nothing to do with whether the proposition passes or not.

ie, he thinks elections are as rigged as a Mob Casino or Professional Wrestling.

-mh
--
[Mostly Harmless]
[ Parent ]

Ah by ucblockhead (4.00 / 1) #135 Tue Oct 28, 2008 at 06:12:45 PM EST
So the "powers that be are genius conspirators" meme.

I have too low a view of human intelligence to take that seriously.
---
[ucblockhead is] useless and subhuman
[ Parent ]

But that's the whole point! by dmg (2.00 / 0) #155 Thu Oct 30, 2008 at 02:04:07 AM EST
They're not human, they're reptilian entities... 
--
How to deal with trolls..
[ Parent ]

Got that right. by CountSpatula (2.00 / 0) #132 Tue Oct 28, 2008 at 03:59:08 PM EST
You are certainly not going to be Mr. Popularity on this website, but you have it right.  I would venture to guess that a good 90% of the tossers preaching Obama Love all over the US simply have absolutely no clue, whatsoever, about local elections, nor care.  More importantly, these people are firmly convinced that Dick Cheney paddled a boat to several different levees in the New Orleans area and planted timed bombs on them, to blow them up, and therefore flood a city that is serious amounts of feet below fucking sea level to begin with.  Katrina is *all* the fault of the Bush Administration, and nobody on the planet can confirm that the city was in for that shit to begin with.  After all, *everybody* knows that there's no chance that a Democrat governor absolutely refused to ask for federal help in evacuating the city beforehand, knowing full well that his state had no chance of doing it successfully.  More importantly, *everybody* knows that the Bush administration has installed weather changing sattelites in space, to specifically create a hurricane that would devastate this area.

I mean, the President of the United States controls absolutely everything in every way, shape and form in the world, right?  That is, after all, how he has been portrayed by the left all these years.



--
Organics.
"I've never been more afraid of a diary comment EVAR." - RapidHamster
[ Parent ]

Hillary Clinton who he still despised. by wiredog (4.00 / 1) #15 Mon Oct 27, 2008 at 04:19:08 AM EST
Was talking to a friend yesterday. A Republican (mostly) who's voting for Obama. If Clinton had been on the ballot he would've voted McCain. So would some Democrats I know. I think Clinton (and, as we later discovered, Edwards) were the only Democrats who could've lost.

Earth First!
(We can strip mine the rest later.)



They have their fans by Merekat (4.00 / 1) #16 Mon Oct 27, 2008 at 04:26:02 AM EST
My mother (not a US citizen and therefore irrelevant - she loved when I said that) has decided that Obama is a liar who somehow stole the rightful nomination from Hilary.

This really is a fascinating election for observing how Jefferson's enlightenment-rationalist republic can probably never happen. (Though Jefferson was far from perfect. All men are created equal, sssh just don't mention the slaves...).


[ Parent ]

I was talking to ana about this yesterday. by toxicfur (2.00 / 0) #24 Mon Oct 27, 2008 at 05:16:57 AM EST
I honestly believe that if Clinton were on the ballot, we would see a much tighter race. Because of the economy, I'm not sure there would be a different outcome for McCain, but I certainly don't think we'd be seeing the polling numbers that we see now. Clinton (and Edwards) matched my own politics slightly better than Obama's do, but Obama is less divisive than Clinton, for sure.

--
To Rollins lesbians are like cuddly pandas: cute, exotic, forest-dwelling, dangerous when riled and unable to produce offspring without assistance.-CRwM
[ Parent ]

Much tighter race by wiredog (4.00 / 1) #33 Mon Oct 27, 2008 at 06:00:39 AM EST
Absolutely. McCain wouldn't have picked Palin, and might have been able to choose a centrist, as Hillary would've energized the right wing base as much as Palin has.

She also would've turned off right-to-centrist types like me who have been seeing "Bush" and "Clinton" on ballots since we were in high school.

I graduated in 1983.

I would've been looking for reasons to vote Clinton rather than against, and don't know if I would've found them.

Earth First!
(We can strip mine the rest later.)

[ Parent ]

We voted yesterday by StackyMcRacky (4.00 / 1) #25 Mon Oct 27, 2008 at 05:17:28 AM EST
I was quite impressed with the number of Libertarians on the ballot. 

In the current issue of Backpacker magazine, they had the results of their reader poll:  is this issue important, is that, where would you like to see X, etc.  In the middle they dropped in this question:  McCain breaks his leg in the Grand Canyon; Obama is lost in the Smokey Mountains:  who survives?  71% said McCain.  Clock thinks Obama might have a chance of survival if he had his Blackberry.  Anyway, I found this question amusing, just kind of thrown in there.



Sounds stupid by theboz (2.00 / 0) #27 Mon Oct 27, 2008 at 05:33:56 AM EST
McCain breaks his leg in the Grand Canyon; Obama is lost in the Smokey Mountains:  who survives?
Realistically, both would be more likely to survive because they wouldn't be on their own.  At this point, both have secret service for life, and as a result would not be out in either wilderness on their own.  Secondly, neither question sets up the scenario properly.  If McCain broke his leg while he is at a scenic overpass a few steps away from his car, his survival is near 100%.  If he were somehow down at the bottom after falling off a boat where the rapids are and is inaccessible and too remote for people to find him, then his survivability changes dramatically.  Plus, the Smokey Mountains have a lot of potential food sources, while the Grand Canyon is fairly desolate and arid.  So while it is funny in a way, it's sort of like asking who would be more likely to survive a zombie holocaust or attack by UFOs.
- - - - -
That's what I always say about you, boz, you have a good memory for random facts about pussy. -- joh3n
[ Parent ]

TOTAL fun hater by StackyMcRacky (2.00 / 0) #29 Mon Oct 27, 2008 at 05:56:38 AM EST
also, since you want to ruin the fun - McCain is an avid backpacker, and makes an annual trip out to the Grand Canyon with his grandson.  That is what the question was referring to.  The readers of the magazine know this.

[ Parent ]

That's really cool -- by toxicfur (2.00 / 0) #31 Mon Oct 27, 2008 at 05:58:47 AM EST
I didn't know that McCain was a backpacker.

I've always wanted to visit the Grand Canyon. I'd rather do one of those burro trips than actually backpack, though.

--
To Rollins lesbians are like cuddly pandas: cute, exotic, forest-dwelling, dangerous when riled and unable to produce offspring without assistance.-CRwM
[ Parent ]

earlier in the year by StackyMcRacky (2.00 / 0) #34 Mon Oct 27, 2008 at 06:13:02 AM EST
they did a big Q&A with McCain about different environmental & park-type issues.  This was the decent McCain, before he devolved into whatever it is we're seeing now.  It was a really interesting read, and I gained a lot of respect for him on the grounds of "he does the same stuff that I do, and understands my view of certain topics."

It really makes me sad that his campaign has turned into the mud-slinging crap that it has become.

[ Parent ]

One of the saddest parts of this election.. by toxicfur (2.00 / 0) #36 Mon Oct 27, 2008 at 06:19:17 AM EST
is how many people have lost respect for McCain. In 2000, I thought he would be a good President, even if he wasn't my first choice. In 2005 (or '06 -- can't remember), I saw McCain speak on a book tour, and I came away with the sense that he was really thoughtful and genuinely cared about issues. Now, I don't even recognize the man who's running for President in McCain's skin. It's incredibly sad.

--
To Rollins lesbians are like cuddly pandas: cute, exotic, forest-dwelling, dangerous when riled and unable to produce offspring without assistance.-CRwM
[ Parent ]

the debates were very sad by aphrael (4.00 / 1) #41 Mon Oct 27, 2008 at 06:44:57 AM EST
the general election ones, that is, because they showed a Sen. McCain who is past his prime and has gone into his decline; a once great politician who is no longer able to play the game well and has become a shadow of himself.

this isn't how i want to remember him.

If television is a babysitter, the internet is a drunk librarian who won't shut up.
[ Parent ]

IAWTP by gzt (2.00 / 0) #47 Mon Oct 27, 2008 at 08:35:07 AM EST
Though I later read the Rolling Stone article about McCain and then retroactively lost respect for him.

[ Parent ]

I had the opposite experience by lm (2.00 / 0) #100 Tue Oct 28, 2008 at 07:34:25 AM EST
After reading the hatchet job Rolling Stone did, I had less respect for Rolling Stone and more respect for McCain. RS literally had nothing good to say about McCain and did their damnedest to turn every single anecdote of his life into a negative judgment.

OTOH, by the time the Rolling Stone article came out I don't think it could have been possible for me to lose any more respect for McCain.


There is no more degenerate kind of state than that in which the richest are supposed to be the best.
Cicero, The Republic
[ Parent ]

it was a complete hatchet job by gzt (2.00 / 0) #102 Tue Oct 28, 2008 at 08:05:31 AM EST
But there were several facts in there - and keep in mind I wasn't too terribly well-informed prior - that shone through. Some of those facts were probably among the things that you knew about prior to reading it that caused you to lose respect for him.

[ Parent ]

Dad did rim to rim to rim when he was 70 or so. by wiredog (4.00 / 1) #64 Mon Oct 27, 2008 at 09:56:04 AM EST
That is, start on the North Rim, hike down to Phantom Ranch, hike up to the South Rim, turn around, hike back.

He did it that one time, and that was enough. Now that he's 80 he doesn't even do rim to rim in less than 2 days anymore.

I, and most of HuSi, couldn't do rim to rim if we running from the zombie infocalypse.

Earth First!
(We can strip mine the rest later.)

[ Parent ]

it's pretty by LilFlightTest (2.00 / 0) #126 Tue Oct 28, 2008 at 01:51:21 PM EST
it was raining when we were there, but it was still really pretty. it would have been a lot better if we trusted our car...

---------
if de-virgination results in me being able to birth hammerhead sharks, SIGN ME UP!!! --misslake
[ Parent ]

Still by theboz (2.00 / 0) #32 Mon Oct 27, 2008 at 06:00:11 AM EST
I wouldn't say a fun hater, but rather someone that enjoys destroying hypothetical questions.  I wouldn't call it a hobby, as I don't get enough chances to do it, but it's something I do to piss people off at work when they try to ask a loaded hypothetical question.

- - - - -
That's what I always say about you, boz, you have a good memory for random facts about pussy. -- joh3n
[ Parent ]

so, fun hater as a hobby. by StackyMcRacky (2.00 / 0) #35 Mon Oct 27, 2008 at 06:13:27 AM EST
FUN HATER!

[ Parent ]

You know what? by theboz (4.00 / 1) #42 Mon Oct 27, 2008 at 07:15:54 AM EST
It's more that I find it fun to destroy others' fun.

- - - - -
That's what I always say about you, boz, you have a good memory for random facts about pussy. -- joh3n
[ Parent ]

*Annual* trip aside by lm (2.00 / 0) #38 Mon Oct 27, 2008 at 06:38:14 AM EST
How much backpacking does McCain actually do these days?


There is no more degenerate kind of state than that in which the richest are supposed to be the best.
Cicero, The Republic
[ Parent ]

Obama by ucblockhead (2.00 / 0) #60 Mon Oct 27, 2008 at 09:46:55 AM EST
Because a 46 year old in good shape is much more likely to survive than a 73 year old in average shape.
---
[ucblockhead is] useless and subhuman
[ Parent ]

why isn't this on the front page yet? by 256 (4.00 / 1) #26 Mon Oct 27, 2008 at 05:31:05 AM EST
great story.

incidentally, the combination of living in the US and not being able to vote has led to a really perverse fascination on my part with the election cycle.

---
I don't think anyone's ever really died from smoking. --ni


Thanks, by toxicfur (2.00 / 0) #28 Mon Oct 27, 2008 at 05:36:27 AM EST
and yeah. My understanding from international news is that people around the world are fascinated with this election cycle.

--
To Rollins lesbians are like cuddly pandas: cute, exotic, forest-dwelling, dangerous when riled and unable to produce offspring without assistance.-CRwM
[ Parent ]

Aumann by Alan Crowe (2.00 / 0) #49 Mon Oct 27, 2008 at 08:48:15 AM EST
I think Granddaddy would have enjoyed reading about Aumann's agreement theorem.



Heh. by toxicfur (2.00 / 0) #51 Mon Oct 27, 2008 at 08:58:54 AM EST
I think you're right. He enjoyed reading about that sort of thing.

--
To Rollins lesbians are like cuddly pandas: cute, exotic, forest-dwelling, dangerous when riled and unable to produce offspring without assistance.-CRwM
[ Parent ]

I Knew It All Along! by CheeseburgerBrown (4.00 / 6) #67 Mon Oct 27, 2008 at 10:56:15 AM EST
...Obama let it be known that it was okay for people of good will to disagree with him.

I knew it all along: Obama is nothing but a shameless Canadian.


I am from a small, unknown country in the north called Ca-na-da.


When will it be over by dmg (2.00 / 0) #76 Mon Oct 27, 2008 at 03:27:31 PM EST
It seems to have been going on for years. All this fuss over which capitalist millionaire you want to rule the country seems excessive.
--
How to deal with trolls..


It's never over by MostlyHarmless (4.00 / 1) #80 Mon Oct 27, 2008 at 04:03:26 PM EST
as soon as this round is done, they'll just start prepping for the next one again...

-mh
--
[Mostly Harmless]
[ Parent ]

And, I'm afraid by ana (2.00 / 0) #83 Mon Oct 27, 2008 at 04:19:25 PM EST
if they made the schedule less regular, like it is over there, the whole process would go on continuously.

"And this ... is a piece of Synergy." --Kellnerin
[ Parent ]

Hard to tell here at the moment by MostlyHarmless (4.00 / 1) #89 Mon Oct 27, 2008 at 11:00:08 PM EST
minority governments tend to mess the usual patterns up, but the overt official campaigning only happens for the 30 days between the writ being dropped and the ballots cast.

Frankly it makes more sense to me... by the time your Presidents get into office, they've been campaigning flat out for 2 years. They're not in need of a trip to the White House, they're in need of a trip to Bermuda.

-mh
--
[Mostly Harmless]
[ Parent ]

Funny by sgt york (4.00 / 1) #157 Thu Oct 30, 2008 at 08:00:30 AM EST
I grew up in a very conservative family, and I'm still pretty conservative on a lot of issues. And by that, I mean the classic US-centric conservative. I used to see very much eye-to-eye with the members of my family, but recently....not so much.

It's not that my views have changed; I still think that government should be small in size, scope, complexity, and budget. That its involvement in the personal lives of the citizenry should be viewed as a sometimes necessary evil that is to be minimized whenever feasible, that people are generally able to take care of themselves if left alone, and that laws exist to protect people from other people.

The problem was that for years I took it for granted that the GOP held those same views. It has become embarrassingly obvious over the past decade that this is simply not true. I don't know how long it has been untrue, and frankly, I don't care. Can't change the past, and I know I screwed up already at least with the last few elections. Time to learn from that mistake and move on.

I had vowed to not get involved in political debate with my family. We see debate as a bloodsport, and it could cause a lot of unnecessary, unproductive, and harmful confrontations. Thanksgiving would be quite unpleasent. I'm the one that lives in a battleground state, not them. Whatever they vote, that state is going to McCain. But I got an e-mail from my parents the other day, basically suggesting that a vote for Obama is not just a bad idea, but is morally wrong. Furthermore, it went out to everyone in the family under the auspices of friendly electoral advice; and everyone knows that we are the only ones with a chance of stepping away from the party line.

Upset me a bit. I decided to respond with a friendly "thanks for the info" and that's it. But then I got a call last night. Started out fine, talking about kids, life, etc. Then my recent trip to Florida, then airfare, then gas, money, economy, taxes, OMG, OBAMARX. Fortunately, I got interrupted, but she requested that I send an e-mail detailing why I thought Obama's tax plan was superior.

Crap. I really didn't want to do it, but I did. I hope it turns out as well as yours did.

There is a reason for everything. Sometimes, that reason just sucks


I hope it does, too. by toxicfur (2.00 / 0) #158 Thu Oct 30, 2008 at 08:06:29 AM EST
Best of luck. Certainly, there are members of my family who I *don't* discuss politics with because I know it could get ugly or because it just doesn't seem worthwhile. My relationship with my grandfather was really special in that I never felt that our discussions would get personal or hurtful, and for that, I am incredibly lucky.

And thanks for voting for Obama. :)

--
To Rollins lesbians are like cuddly pandas: cute, exotic, forest-dwelling, dangerous when riled and unable to produce offspring without assistance.-CRwM
[ Parent ]

Election Day | 160 comments (160 topical, 0 hidden) | Trackback