Election Aftermath, Politics, and All That Jazz
We think the discussion deserves a new chapter (and a location other than the Random Thread).
Date: November 5, 2008
Categories: Ideas, Life, Non-Muse news, The Universe
Comments RSS TrackBack 286 comments
-
1
groundhog22
in November 5th, 2008 @ 12:10Okay… does anyone think that Obama’s being president will fix the economy? Or anything else wrong with this country?
0
0
-
2
Luna the Lovely (11.5 Potterpoints!)
in November 5th, 2008 @ 12:331–no, I can’t say I think him being president will fix much of anything. I can’t say I liked McCain a lot more, but I think he would’ve been better for the country.
As far as post 316 on the last thread:
311-Of course their vote counted! That speech was not official. Besides, noones vote actually counted because the delegates decide on Dec. 4. They don’t have to vote for the person their state voted for. And about alaska…individual Alaskan voters have the least power in the nation in deciding the president bacause of some wierd math.
No, their vote did not count, as polls were still open in AK, and the west coast polls hadn’t even been counted, as they had just closed, when McCain gave his speech. Once one of the presidential candidates gives his concession speech, it doesn’t matter what the actual vote count turns out to be, the other candidate will still win. So, hypothetically speaking, if McCain had won the west coast and AK with enough of margin to overtake Obama (yes, I know, this did not happen), he still would not have won the presidency, since he had given his concession speech.
And I realize that AK’s vote makes very little difference in the big scheme of things, given that we only have three electoral votes, but it’s the principle of the matter–McCain didn’t even wait until our polls–the polls of the state from which his bloody VP candidate was from–had closed. I mean, c’mon, he could’ve waited another hour. No, that wouldn’t have changed the outcome, but at least we Alaskans wouldn’t feel slighted and feel that our vote didn’t mean a damn thing. So yeah, I’m kinda pissed off about that.
As far as weird math–I think it probably has more to do with AK having one of the smallest–if not THE smallest–population of all the states.
And just an end note–this post is not meant in anyway as an attack on democrats or Obama. I am not pleased with the outcome, but honestly, right now I’m more pissed that my vote and that of every other Alaskan didn’t matter, since McCain thought it would be a brilliant idea to concede before our polls even closed. That is what really makes me mad right now, not so much the outcome of the election in general. What harm would it have done to wait an hour or two more? I’m not saying he should have done like happened between Bush and Gore and held out till the very end demanding all sorts of ridiculous recounts, but he could’ve–at the very least–waited until polls closed in his VP’s–MY–state, even if he didn’t want to wait until our votes were counted. That’s what bothers me.
0
0
-
3
I-Man
in November 5th, 2008 @ 12:521,2 – I share the same feelings as my dad – I dislike McCain and I dislike Obama more.
0
0
-
4
The Man For Aeiou
in November 5th, 2008 @ 13:191- Yes. He’s going to fix the war and WORK ON CAPTURING OSAMA, the whole point of the WAR ON TERRORISM! NOT IRAQ!
And REPAL THE DCMA AND LET FAIR USE RAIN IP.
0
0
-
5
KaiYves
in November 5th, 2008 @ 13:571,5- Yes, and he will get us using alternative energy with a ten-year plan on the order of Project Apollo!
0
0
-
6
Robert Coontz (Administrator)
in November 5th, 2008 @ 14:10(3) I-Man: Are you saying that you don’t like anything about either of them? Wow.
0
0
-
7
groundhog22
in November 5th, 2008 @ 14:566 – Hey, I didn’t like either of them either.
0
0
-
8
Vendaval
in November 5th, 2008 @ 14:572- I can understand why you’re frustrated, but McCain would’ve looked a lot worse if he had waited, because Missouri and North Carolina are still processing their results. I don’t really like the whole system either though, whoever you quoted was right in saying that we don’t vote for the candidates, we vote for Electors, who then vote in December. I guess a vote in Alaska would count as much as a vote in New York, or Texas, or Massachusetts.
Wait, where did Robert’s other post go?
0
0
-
9
Robert Coontz (Administrator)
in November 5th, 2008 @ 15:01(3, 7) So, neither John McCain nor Barack Obama has any of the qualities that you would like to see in a president? I admit that they’re bland by comparison with Kokopelli (who isn’t?), but that’s pretty extreme.
(8) It was too long. I decided that nobody would read it, so I retro-zapped it.
0
0
-
10
groundhog22
in November 5th, 2008 @ 15:109 – Well, I’m sure that both of them would be perfectly competent in terms of presidential duties, but I think that Obama doesn’t have enough government experience, and I’ve never liked Republican policies, so I didn’t want McCain either.
0
0
-
11
Cliff Eagle
in November 5th, 2008 @ 15:123, 7. I agree. I would like to see more experience in a president and every other sentence he says has the word “change” in it, but McCain is worse. And Palin is a witch and a witch with a b infront of it instead of the w. Im cool with Joey biden though.
0
0
-
12
groundhog22
in November 5th, 2008 @ 15:1611 – I so agree. Joe Biden should have been the presidential candidate.
0
0
-
13
Robert Coontz (Administrator)
in November 5th, 2008 @ 15:17What you all seem to be saying is that neither candidate is perfect. That’s certainly uncontroversial — and inevitable, I’m afraid.
0
0
-
14
Luna the Lovely (11.5 Potterpoints!)
in November 5th, 2008 @ 15:198–actually, what I’ve heard is that Missouri’s vote is counted, and it’s the first time they’ve voted for a non-winning president for awhile, and the first time a Democratic has won without their vote for a long time (not sure the exact year, but a long while). And I quoted the anonymous “obamabiden”. But regardless, I think he ought to have at least waited until all polls were closed, even if they were not all counted yet.
9–I always read the entirety of all your posts, Robert! You are always very insightful!
0
0
-
15
Luna the Lovely (11.5 Potterpoints!)
in November 5th, 2008 @ 15:24SFTDP, but 11 wasn’t up yet. ok, Cliff Eagle–I don’t deny that Palin is far from perfect, and certainly inexperienced on the national front, but to say she is a witch (or, as you actually said, a bitch) seems to be taking it to a bit of an extreme. Sure, she has plenty of policies that I don’t agree with (namely gay rights and abortion), but she is far from the worst thing that could’ve happened, and she has certainly been a decent governor to my state.
0
0
-
16
groundhog22
in November 5th, 2008 @ 15:2713 – No, what I’m saying is that I don’t think that either of the main candidates would be a good for this country right now. The thing is, I’ve noticed that the candidates have been getting more and more extreme, either towards liberalism or conservatism. And I think that what we need right now is a middle-of-the-roader, to balance things a bit.
0
0
-
17
Vendaval
in November 5th, 2008 @ 15:299- I read all of it too. It was very good, but science does seem to have the ability to draw out anything.
14- That I agree with you on, I wonder if the voter turnout and results differ because of early announcements. I think that might be grounds for legal action.
0
0
-
18
Robert Coontz (Administrator)
in November 5th, 2008 @ 15:32Rebecca liked the post, too, so I’ll try to reproduce it from memory:
(1) As a science editor, I’d call that an empirical question — one to be settled by experiment (in this case, waiting and seeing). For the experiment to be meaningful, however, the observers first have to decide on a few things:
– What is “wrong with the country”? (Make a list. Vague feelings of “wrongness” are impossible to test.)
– Which of those problems can a president fix? (If no president has the power to fix a problem, then you can’t expect this one to do it.)
– Which of them should a president try to fix? (If it’s not his job to fix them, then again, you can’t expect him to do it.)Then, for each problem that remains on the list:
– How will you be able to tell it’s been fixed?
– How can you tell whether the President deserves credit for fixing it?If you can design your experiment with those questions in mind, then I’d say it’s meaningful to ask whether the President can fix what’s wrong with the country. Otherwise, I’d say it’s not.
Bonus question: What does it mean for something, or someone, to be “good for the country”?
0
0
-
19
groundhog22
in November 5th, 2008 @ 15:55Okay, here are my answers:
What is wrong with the country is the economic crisis. Unemployment rates are rising, there are tons of people who are being foreclosed on their loans, the economy is down. The other thing wrong is the Iraq war. It’s becoming another Vietnam.
I would hope that a president could fix the economic crisis by encouraging Congress to pass legislation that would help the economy, and use his veto power to block bills that would make the situation worse. As for Iraq, the president is the Commander-in-Chief of the US military. He should be able to implement a plan that doesn’t involve pulling out cold turkey or staying in there and holding their hands until the cows come home.
I will be able to tell whether the economic crisis has been fixed when unemployment rates go down and the value of the dollar goes back up. And I will be able to tell when we are out of Iraq when there aren’t any more American soldiers in there.
I will be able to tell whether the president deserves credit for fixing these problems by looking up the legislative actions that caused these problems to be fixed and checking if the president was involved in them. I believe that all of that is public record.
My question to the bonus question is: Would you like to see the country run into the ground or not? “Good for the country” is an extremely complex thing, and as I have learned in history, the decline of the Roman Empire was due to an incompetent leader. The fact is, “good for the country” means different things at different times. During the Depression, the New Deal was good for the country. It probably wouldn’t be good for the country today.
0
0
-
20
Beavo
in November 5th, 2008 @ 16:071-No. Not at all.
4-Dude, Al Queda and Osama Bin Laden aren’t the only terrorists out there, y’know.
18-
What’s “wrong” with the country? Most of our government is indirectly run by England. The whole point of the Revolutionary War was to break away, but now we’re back where we started. Plus, our banks aren’t protected well enough, which means forclosures keep going up, which is never a good thing. The war in Iraq should have never started, period. People are scared of nuclear power, which is so much better than “alternative fuels”. And don’t get me started on gay marrage, abortion, and whatever else issues I’ve nitpicked on in the Hot Topics thread.Which of these problems can the president fix? If the president is run by someone, he can’t very well fix it. But it’s our job to elect someone who isn’t controlled. The president can sign the Homeowners and Bank Protection Act, which dosn’t fix, but certainly improves the housing collapse. He can also reunite the brokerage firms with regular banking, like FDR did. Like, almost everything FDR did can be done again. He also has the power to support the energy he thinks we should use.
Which should he fix? It’s kind of his job to run this country, which means he makes the commands for stuff to be fixed. That means everything that he can.
I’m skipping the next two because I need to get back to NaNo, and I’d have to think about those ones, which takes time. But I’ll do the Bonus:
Since “good” is kind of an opnion, it basically means you do what you and the people think is right, and if it works (or pulls you out of a depression or war), then it was good.
*bow*
0
0
-
21
the first post sniper
in November 5th, 2008 @ 16:23The bush administration is the number one culprit for the war in Iraq and the financial crisis. The war always has been “Bush’s war”. No one wanted to go into Iraq but bush led us into a war we couldn’t win and we lost millions of billions of dollars because of that war. The economic crisis is largely because the rich, under the tax cuts of bush, thought they could do anything and spent to much and then it all imploded. Obama is here to give us change to raise the real America out of the ruins of witch it has descended. This country deserves more than the bush ideology that this country uses on a daily basis. Wow that was good! I should write speaches.
0
0
-
22
♫ Agrrrfishi {Aggie}♫
in November 5th, 2008 @ 17:001- Nope. All that’s going to happen is that during Obama’s time in office, the economy will fix itself and Obama will be praised for doing nothing, just like Bush was in his first term.
I cannot believe it. This morning I learned that both embryonic research and people growing marijuana are both legal in MI. I really don’t understand how people can back this. It seems almost impossible that they could be so empty-minded as to do this, especially when the same results as embryonic research could be acheved through harvesting the materialsin umbilical cords. Really, why don’t people listen to the facts? They’re screaming in front of our noses and yet we push them away.
Well, that’s that. Moving to Ireland.
0
0
-
23
Zallie
in November 5th, 2008 @ 17:0619 – You seem to think the president is largely a figurehead in American government. In certain eras of American history (Franklin Pierce, for example), that was the case, but the presidents can also wield enormous power. FDR’s New Deal saved our country from the Depression, Abraham Lincoln kept the Union together, George Washington helped establish our democracy etc. Judging from Obama’s term in the Senate, and his aggressively run campaign, he will fall in the second category and not in the first.
I, for one, am ecstatic about this victory. Just a few days ago, I was in Indiana canvassing and campaigning for my candidate and now he’s been elected to the highest office of our country. I am so proud to have been a part of this piece of history. Yes, we can!
0
0
-
24
Zallie
in November 5th, 2008 @ 17:2622 – you really don’t like weed! Last politics thread, you made a similar comment, which I also found really amusing. If you don’t mind my asking, why are you so against it?
Well, Obama has outlined his plans for the economy. When (if, for you cynical ones) he carries them out and (if) the economy recovers, I would say he deserves the credit. I doubt the economy will recover by itself. Even if it bounces back, a lot of work needs to be done to ensure it will not crash in the future.
Really, why don’t people listen to the facts?
Which facts would those be?
0
0
-
25
The Man For Aeiou
in November 5th, 2008 @ 17:2818-
Why do we have tax cuts for rich people, but then take lots more from poor people, who make miumium wage, and hardly get by?
Why do we have bad public school, which stick our children in to a pit with no good education, while the rich go to private schools and get a vastly superior education, which lets them get ahead and the poor get behiend?
why should we let the banks go unregulated, while main street is hit with red tape?
why should the record companies and the movie industry control how we use the content we bought?
why should women make less money then men at the same job?
why should women not have the option of abortion? (I’m both Pro-Choice and Pro-life.)
why should homosexuals not have the right to marry?
why should disabilites still hurt people in there jobs?
Why should the little guy not be able to get cheap helth care?
why should we not have universal helth care?
Why should we not have universal preschool?
What about global warming? why not a cap and trade system?
why should we not have wind, solar, wave, and other natural engery?
why should we not have universal broadband internet?
why should we not have any of those things?
and that’s just social issues!
The president, with congress and the supreme court, can act NOW to give us:
A graded tax, based on income. the more you make, the more you give back to the country.
A universal k-12 curriculum, based on the work done by core knowledge foundation.
better regulation of companies.
A fair use law, allowing standard things to be done with music, movies, DVDs, and CDs.
a equal rights act, long over due.
a admentment which proves that the right to a woman’s body to do what she want with it, be it have an abortion or not have one, is not taken away.
a admentment that gives the right of marriage to all people, regardless of race, creed, or sexual oraentation, along with stronger gay rights.
a admentment that has stronger disablites protections.
Universal helth care.
Universal Preschool.
a cap and trade system.
more alternitive engerys, with the grid runing 90% clean by the year 2050.
Universal broadband internet.
The problems will be fixed and the president and congress will have sovled them when the things listed above are done.
0
0
-
26
The Man For Aeiou
in November 5th, 2008 @ 17:3022- I am shocked at the fact they have medical marijuana, as it hasn’t been proved to work. the other is just science at work.
0
0
-
27
Mission: Improbable
in November 5th, 2008 @ 17:32YAY! OBAMA!
0
0
-
28
The Man For Aeiou
in November 5th, 2008 @ 17:45To the people of Arizona, California, and Florida, And, (unhonorable Mention) Arkansas,
Well, you’ve done it. you have sunk to the level of the jim crow south. you have made it ilegal for homosexuals to exicize there right of marriage in your states. bad job, you three. arkansas, not quite as low, but by making sure that homosexuals do not Adopt, you have had and unhonorable mention.
0
0
-
29
ObamaBiden2012
in November 5th, 2008 @ 17:46Wait-tell me, what is wrong with this country? Not that I don’t know, but we should start from the beginning. No one truly answered that. I think the problem is our government, in its very essence. We are being held up by the poor class, and as the world changes, we fall. This will continue unless we move far, far, to the left. We need a new system of government. Just like feudalism, this system has failed. Get ready-If we truly want to improve, we’re in for a rough ride.
0
0
-
30
Robert Coontz (Administrator)
in November 5th, 2008 @ 17:50(29) What do you have in mind?
0
0
-
31
Sweet Melpomene
in November 5th, 2008 @ 17:5013- *high fives*
I, for one, am quite depressed that Prop 8 passed. Aside from that, it’s pretty okay from where I’m standing. None of the anti-choice bills passed, and many of the anti-discrimination ones did. Lovely.
Onward.
– What is “wrong with the countryâ€?
Firstly, I’ll define things that are “wrong” for the country as being laws and circumstances that could cause the nation to be in an unfavourable state.
Secondly, I’ll pick out a list of commonly accepted bad stuff from Wikipedia . It is as follows:
# 1 Poverty-related crisis
—–Malnutrition crisis intervention
—–Unemployment and Underemployment
———-Unemployment intervention
# 2 Economic crisis
# 3 Environmental crisis
—–Environmental disaster
—–Natural disaster
—–Endangered species
# 4 International crisis
We’ve gotmostall of those covered.– Which of those problems can a president fix?
Any and all that can be fixed, or at least properly addressed by him signing the appropriate bill. It’s not just the president, it’s the entirety of the government. They’ve all got some shaping up to do.– Which of them should a president try to fix?
Any and all that he can. Of course, going in order of immediate importance. The economy and the war stand out.Then, for each problem that remains on the list:
– How will you be able to tell it’s been fixed?
– How can you tell whether the President deserves credit for fixing it?
Seeing as this is more sociology than anything, it can be declared fixed when the people affected are happy. Or, in the case of the economy, when the national debt goes down. The president deserves credit if he’s directly involved with whatever good stuff results. As does everyone else involved. Sadly the authors of bills rarely get credit. Hm, come to think of it, it’s usually the activists organizing campaigns for the cause, and the people who write pretentious and overly lengthy books on the subject. Alas.If you can design your experiment with those questions in mind, then I’d say it’s meaningful to ask whether the President can fix what’s wrong with the country. Otherwise, I’d say it’s not.
Bonus question: What does it mean for something, or someone, to be “good for the country�
True that. And yet, it’s so subjective that only history will decide, eh?
And let’s define things that are “good for the country” as any favourable conditions leading to
–increased life expectancy (put this down as good health care, low rates of disease…and…)
–better standards of living
–higher GDP, less debt, healthy economy, proper free market
–improved international relations
–high government approval ratings
–more exports than imports
–less discrimination
–not getting blown up
as well as many more. You’d probably need a survey on what the good stuff is, with a random sample and whatnot, done properly.That being said, I doubt four years is enough time to “fix” the nation, but I’d very much like to be proven wrong.
Also, off-topic, but when did the colours change?
0
0
-
32
Sweet Melpomene
in November 5th, 2008 @ 17:52Oh, and tearing up and burning NCLB. Gah. Higher education standards! Affordable college! Not scaling everything to the lowest common denominator. Not worrying that something might hurt someone’s feelings. But that’s a rant for another time.
0
0
-
33
Lizzie
in November 5th, 2008 @ 17:58BOO Proposition 8. Boo.
On the other hand, yay Obama. Finally, we may be able to salvage our reputation with the rest of the world, fix the health care system, and have a president who actually listens to both experts and the people.
26 – what’s wrong with medical marijuana? There have been studies that shows that it helps. And even if it’s just recreational, marijuana is not nearly as bad for your health / dangerous as tobacco, which is legal, and is better than / about equal to alcohol, which is also legal.
0
0
-
34
Luna the Lovely (11.5 Potterpoints!)
in November 5th, 2008 @ 18:0228–yes, I quite agree–as I mentioned on the countdown thread, my aunt’s (who lives in FL) jubilant reaction to FL’s ruling made me truly nauseous. And preventing them from adopting is just as bad–homosexuals can be every bit as good of parents as heterosexuals!
0
0
-
35
Brendan The Science Whiz/Fforde Ffan (37 Brain Points)
in November 5th, 2008 @ 18:08ooh! I think Obama is great, though I am not ready to argue my opinion due to my six hours (or less because of reading Al Franken (who, by the way, I hope wins the recount for senate) (and, yes, he is a bit democratically biased, but he is funny, and he does not have 35 pages of endnotes that contridict everything he says.)) of sleep because of my staying up for both of the presidential speeches and the polls.
By the way, what did you think about McCains conceding speech? I think that he really reverted to his pre-presidential race form, when he could actually boast of being a maverick. He changed into a candidate who I would consider voting for if some of his policies changed. Obama’s speech also was flawless. When he started talking, I could imagine him in the oval office, with soaring approval, and a sucessful economy.
I’m pretty happy about how this all turned out.
0
0
-
36
Luna the Lovely (11.5 Potterpoints!)
in November 5th, 2008 @ 18:1431–the first colour change was on Hallowe’en, when we changed to orange and black, and then on November first, the GAPAs switched over to the current autumn colour scheme.
And SFTDP
0
0
-
37
The Man For Aeiou
in November 5th, 2008 @ 18:2633- my health teacher said it hads no benifit. and it has more tar then tobacco.
0
0
-
38
oxlin
in November 5th, 2008 @ 18:2834- agreed. I agree with what SM said also and with most of what TMFA said. TMFA, not all public school programs are bad. Until college, I went to entirely public schools. In elementary school, I learned to speak Spanish near fluently through an immersion program. In high school, I had the opportunity to work towards the IB diploma, writing many many papers and orals and things. I think I received an excellent education which was entirely at public schools.
0
0
-
39
KaiYves
in November 5th, 2008 @ 18:4625- And don’t forget going back to the Moon. Obama’s for that, too!
0
0
-
40
Mission: Improbable
in November 5th, 2008 @ 18:59Woahness! No Senator for MN!
I voted for Dean Barkley. The other two are mean.
0
0
-
41
Ã߀ƒ
in November 5th, 2008 @ 19:0125- Everything that is run by the government just sucks. Don’t even get me started on the quality of general hospitals. And I’m sure you see the problems with our public education system. If we got rid of private schools, everyone, rich or poor, would get a lousy education. At least let some of us have opportunities!
0
0
-
42
oxlin
in November 5th, 2008 @ 19:1641- speak for yourself. My public school education wasn’t lousy thank you very much.
0
0
-
43
Zallie
in November 5th, 2008 @ 19:2641 – You have impossibly high standards. I’m not sure where you got the idea that everything “sucks.” There is a notable lack of funding, to be sure, but that doesn’t mean public education and healthcare are hopeless. I attended a public highschool and it was ranked highly on a national level, higher than all the private schools in the state. I think I recieved a better education that many of my private school friends, because my school was more diverse and the students felt fortunate to be there and therefore more interested in learning. Private schools are often homogeneous environments of wealthy students who have a sense of ‘entitlement’ that public school children do not. This was certainly the case in my grade-school and in the private highschools in my city.
Also within my city, there are schools that dont even meet the minimum standards. Gentrification, poverty, lack of funding: all of those things are problems that need to be addressed. However, progress is being made and I think that’s a step in the right direction.
I’m curious as to what you think the solution for everything that “sucks.” What should the government be doing differently? Or do you object to government sponsored/funded education and healthcare on principle?
At least let some of us have opportunities!
What do you mean by that? It comes off as quite elitist.
0
0
-
44
Zallie
in November 5th, 2008 @ 19:302 – Your vote was certainly counted (in fact, votes are still being counted as I type!) but because your state has so few electoral votes, it could not have changed the outcome of the election. It changed the overall electoral count, which is still being altered, but not the overall outcome. McCain conceded because he knew he could not win (California is one of the most liberal states in America; clearly it would go for Obama), it was the polite thing to do, and because, frankly, I think he just wanted this whole thing to be over.
0
0
-
45
Robert Coontz (Administrator)
in November 5th, 2008 @ 19:35If people in Alaska are annoyed, think how Hawaiians must feel.
0
0
-
46
Amelia Peabody
in November 5th, 2008 @ 19:39But other countries, like those in Europe, have government run school programs and do very well. No public school is perfect, and we currently are putting to much emphasis on tests. I spoke to Obama when he was campaigning in Iowa, and I told him this. I am glad that he has emphasized this, including foreign language throughout his campaign.
My public school has a very good theater program, and I wouldn’t trade it for anything else. The essential problem with private schools is they can do whatever they want; they aren’t constrained by government standards. They could, if they wanted to, not admit students because of their race. I’m not saying many, or even a few schools, do this, but it is a valid argument. We should not try to eradicate private schools, but we shouldn’t take money that could otherwise be used for public schools and give it to them.
0
0
-
47
Piggy
in November 5th, 2008 @ 19:46Has anyone heard of the FOCA? Probably not, because the liberal media made sure it didn’t get out. Barack Obama promised it would be the very first thing he did as president. The FOCA, or Freedom Of Choice Act, does basically this: if any state has a ban or restriction on abortion, the FOCA repeals it. Bingo, instant unrestricted murder.
Quite a historic election. By that, I mean we’ve never messed up this bad.
TMFA- Just because not every person in the world agrees with you does not make them racist (referring to post 28, which I really didn’t quite understand). And you can’t be pro-abortion as well as pro-life. If you support this illusion of choice, you support legalized murder, which is most definitely not pro-life.
0
0
-
48
Armada (17 piepoints)
in November 5th, 2008 @ 19:47Okay, sorry if this is kind of off topic, but does anyone know whether the third MA question passed? I was online when they announced it…..
0
0
-
49
Cliff Eagle
in November 5th, 2008 @ 19:4941- Do I detect an ounce of Communism? Just a warning- Communism as described by Marx is less realistic than unicorns. Its human nature. Some will always want to have more than others. And my town happens to have one of the best public education systems in the country and my education would suffer if public schooling was eliminated. And its true, some regions have worse public schooling, but little education is better than none, which would happen if the public school systems were eliminated. Honestly, how do you expect America’s poor to be able to pay for rising private school rates? And communism doesn’t eliminate poverty, it makes sure everyone is poor. It also destroys education. Basically, Communism is a great idea if you can get it to work right. Jesus, I’d sign right up for a community where everyone is equal and we are all paid the same and live in harmony. However, Communism is the most dumbass way to run a country as well because it is only human nature to want more. That’s why every single communist country has failed miserably. So before you go around shouting “Long live the Proletariat” and other communist bs, IBCF, take away all your electronic devices including the computer that you are reading this post with, take away your parents’ jobs, and a lot of “excess” food you are eating. I know being a revolutionary is extremely cool (so is voting Obama apparently), but realize that once you start complaning about Marxist rule, you are shipped to a godforsaken death camp in a corner of the world. Or killed. Now you probably like public schooling now, huh? [snip! Please refrain from name-calling. Nothing is gained by it. –Admin.]
0
0
-
50
Amelia Peabody
in November 5th, 2008 @ 20:13Hmmm….I still think one can be pro-choice, but still think abortion is wrong.
Funny, if you saw Farenheight 9/11 you might have second thoughts before calling abortion “legalized murder”.
Wars kill people after their born, which is much worse.
And I don’t think Barack Obama would do that. He has been very flexible on this issue, he voted “present” on abortion legalization before. I’d like to know where you got your information, since a lot of the bad stuff about Obama turned out to be lies.
Furthermore, you shouldn’t vote on a candidate just because of one issue. It’s not smart.
I was ecstatic last night. I felt like yelling, laughing, crying, dancing in the street. And I can’t even vote.
Forty years after Martin Luther King was assassinated, we have elected an African-American as President. I am proud of this, and I am Caucasian.
We have come so far, and we could go farther. That is Barak Obama’s true genius. He is an amazingly smart man, who appoints good people, and has run the best campaign in a very long time. But his greatest gift is his ability to inspire people. He tells us that we will get their if we work for it. That he is not really the one who changed America, we did.
Yes, we did.
That doesn’t sound like Socialism to me.
0
0
-
51
oxlin
in November 5th, 2008 @ 20:21Legalized murder? Err. no. That is not true. Taking away a women’s right to choose means taking away her options. By giving her a right to choose the government is giving her choices /not/ forcing her to decide whatever the country thinks. No woman is forced to get an abortion. It is her own decision whether or not she wishes to get one, not the government’s.
0
0
-
52
Zallie
in November 5th, 2008 @ 20:2247 – Why would the liberal media try to cover something up that most liberals would support? That doesn’t make any sense.
Are you really sure you want to bring up abortion again anyway? Last time, if I remember correctly, you got quite upset and stormed out of the thread after telling us we were all going to face His wrath. If you want to talk about it, I’m up for it, but don’t start this debate again if you plan to ignore the questions and points the opposition make and simply threaten us with Hell.
49 – Maybe I’m crazy, but I didn’t see any communism in that post, just a (perhaps unwarranted) disgust for the gov’t, but you responded very passionately. You really can’t stand communism, can you
McCarthy?
0
0
-
53
Cliff Eagle
in November 5th, 2008 @ 20:3452- No- but first off, McCarthy was terrible for killing people’s freedom of thought and ideology- a communist principle in itself (funny how that works). I am saying that you can believe whatever the hell you want- You could be a Satan worshiper for all i care, and I’m not forcing my opinions, just explaining the consequences of decisions. No, I don’t like communism, it suppresses minority ethnic groups and leads to extinction of languages (another thing I care passionately about), and as a written principle it’s OK, but nobody will ever create an effective Communist country.
0
0
-
54
groundhog22
in November 5th, 2008 @ 20:3423 – Where do you get that from?
25 – Universal preschool is not necessarily a good thing. Statistics show that Head Start and other preschool programs don’t really have an effect on school performance after grade 2. And I’d much rather have my kids home longer before I have to give them up to the school system. Also, take it from someone who pays taxes, taxes are graded. I didn’t have to pay anything in the end because I made so little money.
49 – Just curious, why do you think that IBCF is getting communistic leanings? He said that government-run institutions suck, not that they’re good.
0
0
-
55
Cat's Meow
in November 5th, 2008 @ 20:3741 – I don’t know about you, but my school rocks. And, guess what: we’re an unconventional, choice, project-based school. I can’t imagine going to any other school. Maybe instead of just scrapping government-run schools we should actually try to improve them with something besides standardized testing.
0
0
-
56
The Man For Aeiou
in November 5th, 2008 @ 20:3738- (Oxlin)- We need that in the rest of the country!
39- (KaiYves)- Not a socal issue. space is part of the national parks section.
41- (IBCF!)- well, good luck driving on the pritive roads. and what about the fire department that makes you pay them a lot before they save the house? or the police? or the library system?
Not every thing they do sucks.
Oh, and the plan doesn’t get rid of private schools. it improves the public schools.
43- (Zallie)- Thats the point of the plan. it has the schools get back on an equal footing.
45- (Robert)Hawaii’s polls closed with the rest of the pacfic coast.
46- Less test, more real material. privates schools do what they want.
47- (Piggy) Well, unrestied except it’s just for unborn, non-sexed, non-indepentent tumor like things. you can’t call that a murder.
Homosexuals are the same as Hetrosexuals, but have a different atration. why deny them a RIGHT? ALL MEN (*AND NOW WOMEN) ARE BORN EQUAL.
I support a woman’s RIGHT to choose to abort or not abort there fetus (PRO-CHOOSE). I would prefer that she doesn’t (PRO-LIFE), BUT IF SHE WANTS TO, SHE CAN. IT’S HER RIGHT!!!!
Keep it rare, keep it safe, and keep it legal.
0
0
-
57
Vendaval
in November 5th, 2008 @ 20:3947- Well, if I were a Republican trying to get his party back on track, I’d stop complaining about the “liberal media bias”, and get some things done. Yes, Obama is pro-choice. We all know that.
(I echo Zallie, oxlin, and Amelia Peabody)TMFA’s post 28 is referring to the propositions in several state ballots, making gay marriage illegal, and, in the very, very sorry case of Arkansas, making adoption by gay parents illegal. It is comparable to Jim Crow. I am truly deeply saddened. Hopefully with Obama in office things like this will change.
I’m going to say this once: No sane person is pro-abortion.
49- Whoah, clam down! I think IBCF is actually on your side. We’re all well aware of how deeply you resent communism, can we civilly discuss watered-down socialism?
0
0
-
58
The Man For Aeiou
in November 5th, 2008 @ 20:41Hit the simmit button to soon.
49- (CE) Didn’t see any communism, but a lot of liberationism
51- perfect!
0
0
-
59
oxlin
in November 5th, 2008 @ 20:46Mm. I am deeply disatisfied and frustrated with the inequalities that our country is promoting. (Prop 8 and all that)
but. Huzzah! My state had eighty percent voter turn out! go Minnesota!
0
0
-
60
The Man For Aeiou
in November 5th, 2008 @ 20:5354- Universal Preschool would be optional. It would give poorer families day care, and it would give us a burst to 2nd grade
55- Improve, not scrap. that’s the point.
57- good job explaining. I’m still upset. We elected a African-American, showing just how equal we are. but on the same day, the same day we broke the color line, we moved 10% of our population of three states down a peg in the social status. and in one state, the most visable form of discrimation ever. Oh my person i worship. this is about the same as jim crow or any law about women. this is discrimation, thru and thru. IT IS ILLEGAL TO DO THIS!
0
0
-
61
Luna the Lovely (11.5 Potterpoints!)
in November 5th, 2008 @ 20:5344–yes, votes are being “counted” still, but as McCain has given his concession speech, Obama has officially won, regardless of what the uncounted votes might say to alter the conclusion. (I’m not saying that the votes will come in and McCain will have won–I’m well aware that’s not happening, but since he’s given his speech, even if that were to happen, Obama would still be president, thus the votes that are sitll being counted, don’t actually count.) And yes, I know AK, with it’s three electoral votes would have done nothing to swing the election unless it was very, very close (which it was not), which is why, as I said, it is the principle of the matter.
45–Hawaii doesn’t do DST, though, unless I”m mistaken, so they are….on the same time as AK now, no? so, they shouldn’t be anymore pissed than any Alaskans.
50–you’re right, one issue voting is not good, and yet, that is exactly what happened. Everybody one issue voted on the matter of economy, thus electing Obama. They thought he’d be super duper awesome for the economy, so they ignored everything else he might support, thus one issue voting him into the presidency.
Personally, I think Obama should take his idiotic socialism/Robin Hood steal-from-the-rich-and-give-to-the-poor & his PB&J and kindergarten toys and sho–I don’t think I should finish that sentence. And if you don’t understand my reference to PB&J/kindergarten toys, then I guess you ahve either A)never listened to him speak, or B) he never used that analogy except when he spoke on my campus. Let’s just say that analogy was total BS, and be done with it.
And now, I think I shall take my leave, before I say something that I might seriously regret.
0
0
-
62
Armada (17 piepoints)
in November 5th, 2008 @ 20:54I’m sorry to interrupt your debate (*coughcoughalloutstreetfightcough*), but would someone mind answering my question?
0
0
-
63
The Bookworm & Lurline (410 piepoints and three B-Day Points and 42 KAG Points! And 5 Wung Points!)
in November 5th, 2008 @ 20:54One thing I disagree with in Politics: The term “Pro-Life”.
Pro-Life should not mean Anti-Abortion.
Pro-Life should mean: Compulsory Vegetarianism, No Hunting, No Death Penalty and No Abortion!
Then you might have a logical term.
Also, I note that this thread has become very flamey.
I know that some people are upset about the Election results, but that’s no excuse.
(And McCarthy shouldn’t be employed as a name-call. He’s been dead for years!)
0
0
-
64
Luna the Lovely (11.5 Potterpoints!)
in November 5th, 2008 @ 20:58Oh, and actually, Robert, come to think of it, according to all the poll updates online, they had Alaska closing latest, with Hawaii closing an hour earlier with the west coast–so if they were right, then Hawaii’s polls would ahve been closed, just not counted when McCain conceded, thus leaving AK the only polls still open. Still, at the very least, like I said in my last post, they closed at the same time, and no late rthan AK, but I think they actually closed earlier.
0
0
-
65
The Guy Your Parents Warned You About
in November 5th, 2008 @ 20:59I am overjoyed that the whole accursed thing is over. I hate politics. And I can’t say I liked anything about this election, except maybe the SNL skits. McCain’s not very good, Obama is no better. As long as Obama doesn’t do anything stupid, it should be okay.
I’m glad that we’ve gotten rid of the racial barrier. I’ve got nothing against an African-American president. I’m not an Obama fan, but as I said before, as long as he doesn’t screw up, I’m okay.
0
0
-
66
The Man For Aeiou
in November 5th, 2008 @ 21:0063- But you have to kill plants!
0
0
-
67
Luna the Lovely (11.5 Potterpoints!)
in November 5th, 2008 @ 21:0163–i hope you’re not suggesting that compulsory vegetarianism actually be implemented, because I would revolt and hunt you down–I like my meat (sorry, not trying to be offensive to vegetarians, I care not if you choose to personally eat no meat, just don’t force it on me–i don’t people trying to force their views on me, regardless of the topic).
0
0
-
68
Axa
in November 5th, 2008 @ 21:0228) I am ashamed of my state. It’s only beginning to sink in because the ACLU is filing a case and I still have a glimmer of hope it will be shot down. California baby, when did you get like this?
I reel at the hatred and suspicion in the hearts of others, so transparently hidden beneath a visage of “protecting marriage” and”protecting children”. Why, why should my friends be denied of rights because of something so wholly personal? For who they are?
I suppose that we might as well ban interracial marriage now too.at least prop 4 didn’t pass– it would require parent notification if a minor seeks and abortion. preemptively: this is a bad idea because it would force girls to seek unsafe abortions or even to physically harm themselves, and potentially harm from parents/family members if they were forced to divulge the information. not all families are accepting or loving…blanket measures like this pay no attention to particular circumstance. the “personhood” amendment in Colorado didn’t pass either, which is also good.
and prop on the condition of farm animals (alice you may be somewhat happy to hear that!)
0
0
-
69
Zallie
in November 5th, 2008 @ 21:02TMFA totally has the right idea: let’s put people’s names next to the number of their post, so we can tell who everyone is responding too. That would eliminate so much confusion.
53 (Cliff Eagle) – McCarthy wasn’t a communist himself, so I don’t see what’s so ironic about him repressing free speech which is, itself, a characteristic of communism and democracy. I see that you’re “just explaining the consequences” but I think you’re overreacting a bit. How does communism ruin education? Also, I’m still curious as to if the person you responded to was really talking about communism in the first place!
43 (TMFA) – What plan? I’m not following what you’re talking about.
59 (oxlin) – 80% is incredible! We didn’t even have that much for the single precinct I was working in on election day. Ours was around 66% which is really good for a neighborhood that doesn’t really speak English.
0
0
-
70
groundhog22
in November 5th, 2008 @ 21:04My state had pretty good voter turnout too. Unfortunately, the majority of those voters voted to allow slot machines in my state. Just what we’ve always needed. A bunch of gamblers who will probably be wreaking havoc and mayhem. (I’m basing this assumption on what happens every year during the Preakness Stakes.)
0
0
-
71
The Man For Aeiou
in November 5th, 2008 @ 21:0969(Zallie) The Idea came from rebecca (Or maybe roseanna) who always does it.
The plan is post 25.
0
0
-
72
Zallie
in November 5th, 2008 @ 21:1163 (Bookworm) – I haven’t noticed any flaming.
61 (Luna) – But Obama already had over 270 electoral votes. He had already won. McCain could not have won, even if he won all the remaining electoral votes (which he was highly unlikely to do, given the small amount of effort he put into those states). Even if we had counted ballots from the otherside of the country first, McCain still would not have won, so I’m not really sure what your argument is. I think he gave a very dignified concession speech. If he had waited and waited, until the last of the votes were in, he still would not have won, and he would have looked a fool for holding out on that slim chance that all the west-coast states would swing his way. In conceding after the race was called (or “early” as you put it) I think he maintained his dignity and regained status in many voters’ minds. I really liked his speech and I’m glad he’s back to being the real “maverick” not the campaign-crazed McCain we saw during the election. Now, he can be my favourite Republican again!
62 (Amanda) – If no one has answered, it’s probably because no one knows. Why don’t you look it up?
0
0
-
73
Zallie
in November 5th, 2008 @ 21:1471 (TMFA) – Oh, okay. You mean the universal K-12 education system? I don’t know if I want a universal system, but I think all schools should have to meet universal standards.
0
0
-
74
Robert Coontz (Administrator)
in November 5th, 2008 @ 21:15(61) Luna — I haven’t seen any evidence that many of Obama’s supporters based their votes solely on the economy and on nothing else. In fact, I think it extremely unlikely that they did. All of the endorsements I’ve seen mentioned several factors.
(48) Armada — do you mean the ballot initiative banning greyhound racing in Massachusetts? It passed.
0
0
-
75
Ã߀ƒ
in November 5th, 2008 @ 21:1643- I’m sure that many people here go to great, wonderful public schools. I’m just saying that we should keep both options available, because private schools
are usuallyare oftenmay be better. Basically, I believe it’s better for some of us to get quality education than for none of us to get quality education. And remember, we’re still paying for public school–through our taxes.49- Wait, what? I said they were bad, but I didn’t say anything about getting rid of them.
56- We should have both public and private institutions. I’m just saying that government controlled things aren’t
veryquite asalways as efficient.
0
0
-
76
Zallie
in November 5th, 2008 @ 21:1867 (Luna) – “I care not if you choose to personally eat no meat, just don’t force it on me–i don’t people trying to force their views on me, regardless of the topic).”
Aren’t you pro-life/anti-choice? Excuse me if I’m wrong. I may be getting you mixed up with someone else.
But, if you are indeed a pro-life/anti-choice person, how is what you posted any different from banning abortions, which would be, essentially, a view being forced on millions of American women? You don’t like people forcing views on you, so why would you force your view on another?
0
0
-
77
groundhog22
in November 5th, 2008 @ 21:1860 – (TMFA) Sorry. I was under the impression that the terms “Universal Preschool” and “optional” were mutually exclusive.
0
0
-
78
Vendaval
in November 5th, 2008 @ 21:19(48, 62) Armada, was your question: whether the third MA question passed?
I’m not quite sure what you’re talking about,
CNN only shows one question for Massachusetts, Question One (Income tax). What did the question ask?
…I think I found an answer, Yes, dog racing will be outlawed by 2010. But don’t take my word as absolute.
0
0
-
79
Luna the Lovely (11.5 Potterpoints!)
in November 5th, 2008 @ 21:2672–like, I said, it’s the principle of the matter–yes, Obama would still have been the winner, regardless, but the least McCain could’ve done was wait an hour to give hi speech, so that all th epolls had closed. If he had done that–waited just one hour, then I wouldn’t be so pissed off. I know our vote wouldn’t have made any difference, but to have him give his speech for AK’s polls had even closed–especially when that is the state from which his VP candidate hailed, and especially when it is my state–makes me mad. Because, in reality, in means our vote didn’t count at all–Obama was already “elected”, since McCain had given his speech, so I really feel like I might as well not have even voted for all the good it did–McCain didn’t even wait for us to finish voting before he “decided” the outcome.
I mean, if you were from a state, such as AK, and the election was decided before your polls even closed, because one of the candidates gave his concession speech, wouldn’t you be pissed, despite the fact that you know it really didn’t matter in theory, as your state had so few electoral votes?
I’m not saying he should have waited til every last vote was counted, but he could have waited an hour more, until all the polls were at least closed, and I don’t think anyone would have thought any less of him. And I, for one, would at least feel like vote was worthwhile, instead of feeling that my first presidential election was a total joke, as the election was ended before my state’s polls even closed.
0
0
-
80
The Man For Aeiou
in November 5th, 2008 @ 21:2877- (Groundhog) It would, In my eyes, be a free, publicly provide, taxpayer payed for, preschool, but you wouldn’t have to send you kids there, just like you can homeschool now or private school them.
75(IBCF) More learning styles should be given in schools.
0
0
-
81
Luna the Lovely (11.5 Potterpoints!)
in November 5th, 2008 @ 21:2976–no, I’m pro-choice
0
0
-
82
Zallie
in November 5th, 2008 @ 21:3175 (IBCF) – What is your evidence for assuming private schools are better than public ones? I’ve attended both (a Montessori primary school and a public high school) and they all have their pros and cons. I’m curious as to where you draw this conclusion. Have you ever attended a public school?
Also, you hardly responded to any of the questions I posed. What do you suppose the gov’t should do to fix the institutions you believe “suck?”
Quoting myself:
” What should the government be doing differently? Or do you object to government sponsored/funded education and healthcare on principle?
At least let some of us have opportunities!
What do you mean by that? It comes off as quite elitist.”Also, private schooling is often only for the wealthy (scholarships exist, I know, but most private school students have wealthy families). If that education really is (as you believe it to be) better isn’t that a very elitist system?
I’m not against private schools. I think alternative education (Montessori, Waldorf etc.) is a great idea. Public school isn’t for everyone. I just object to the elitism that seems to divide private schoolers and the masses.
0
0
-
83
groundhog22
in November 5th, 2008 @ 21:3168 – (Axa) There’s a series of animations that I think you’d like, although you may have seen it already. The basic premise of it is that there’s a city which is populated by (sentient) cats and rabbits. A rabbit falls in love with a cat, which is against the law. They stay together anyway, but this causes some…problems. I realize that it won’t help anything, but at least we know that someone else sympathizes with us, right? (Google “there she is”, it’s the third result)
0
0
-
84
Zallie
in November 5th, 2008 @ 21:5479 (Luna) – I think all the polls had closed, though. The votes just weren’t counted. I’m not exactly sure how either of us can verify this. I’m looking around online.
0
0
-
85
Zallie
in November 5th, 2008 @ 22:0279 (Luna) – Excuse me, my error. I thought you lived in Arkansas, not Alaska, which have similar abbreviations. I still don’t understand your point, however. McCain had lost the race, so he conceded. You are not disenfranchised any more than the liberals in Idaho (who also feel their votes don’t count) or the other states whose results are not fully tallied (MI, NC).
I’m really glad he made the speech when he did, because if he had waited another few hours, America would have gone to bed. After these long, drawn out elections, the promptness was really nice!
0
0
-
86
Axa
in November 5th, 2008 @ 22:1883– awwwww… that was so cute! that did make me feel better!
speaking of youtube…did anyone see the videos of people spontaneously breaking into song at union square? hearing the anthem sung by a crowd like that is amazing. this election has left me without the ability to describe anything except as “amazing” but man oh man
0
0
-
87
Luna the Lovely (11.5 Potterpoints!)
in November 5th, 2008 @ 22:1984–well, I called my sister at 10:30 pm central time Tuesday, to let her know the numbers and official report I’d just gotten offline, saying Obama was the winner. At this point, it was 7:30 Alaska time, and my sister, also currently in the central time zone, had already watched McCain’s concession speech, and since the polls in AK were still open at the time, the only conclusion i can draw, is he gave his speech before all the polls were closed. My sis said he gave it at 10 central, right after the West coast polls closed, which means that AK still had open polls for one more hour.
ok, this is taken from the official Alaska election site: “The polling places will be open from 7:00 a.m. to 8:00 p.m. on Election Day.”
Thus, as it was still 7:30 AK time when I called my sis, and she had already watched McCain’s concession speech, AK polls were still open.
so, the only “proof” I have is the time listed in my cell phone of when I initiated the call to my sister: 10:26 central time, at which point she had already watched mcCain’s concession speech, and at which time AK polls still had 34 minutes to go before they closed. And as this was after his speech, clearly he started his speech probably a good fifteen or thirty minutes prior to that phone call–while AK polls still had an hour to go. No, that is not a long time, but it still means they were open.
0
0
-
88
Luna the Lovely (11.5 Potterpoints!)
in November 5th, 2008 @ 22:2685–disregard my response to 84, then…..
But as far as not feeling like my vote counted, as our polls were still open, thus meaning there was no official tally of any of our votes, our entire state was basically kicked out of the whole election process–we might as well have not voted: our vote was not taken into account at all (like I said, I know, it would not have changed the outcome even if it had been, but at least I for one would feel like I had participated in the election, instead of feeling like I might as well’ve not voted–which is how his not waitiing just one hour more makes me feel). And the fact that his vp was from that state that he decided was important enough to be part of the election process makes me even more angry.
One hour more, and I don’t think significantly more people would have been in bed than were in bed at the time he gave his speech. I’m not saying he should have dragged it out for several more hours, merely waited one hour–one measly hour–until all the polls were closed. I don’t think that would’ve been too much to ask.
0
0
-
89
Robert Coontz (Administrator)
in November 5th, 2008 @ 22:27McCain phoned Obama around 11 p.m., Eastern time (7 p.m. Alaska time) and started his concession speech at 11:15 p.m. (7:15 Alaska time). If the polls in Alaska were open until 8:00 local time, then his speech started 45 minutes before they closed.
The votes were counted, though. I’ve seen the numbers. You’re counted in the popular vote, and Alaska’s three electoral votes went to McCain. You’re on the scoreboard. Alaska was not disenfranchised.
0
0
-
90
Cat's Meow
in November 5th, 2008 @ 23:0288 – I know that I, personally, would have been asleep. By the time the polls closed here at 8 it was already 11 on the East Coast, and I was pretty darn tired. If the speeches had each been an hour later I probably wouldn’t have bothered to stay up and watch them, and I would have missed Obama’s amazing speech.
Not to be rude or anything, but I think that McCain did what was best. He conceded as soon as he knew there was no chance for him to win. I think that’s the only thing he could do, really.
0
0
-
91
Jadestone
in November 5th, 2008 @ 23:04I keep trying to read through this thread and the other one but it really just makes me irritated and sad, so I’m not going to comment on a lot of stuff even though I might have things to say on some of them.
Actually there was one thing I saw in passing– on marijuana, and it being legal for medicinal purposes/people not thinking it should be, I think that if something can help someone there shouldn’t be a reason for them not to have the option of having it.
For example, schizophrenics– most, if they didn’t smoke before they were diagnosed, pick it up– there’s no concrete proof but it’s believed that it alliviates some of their symptoms. Now I don’t think people should smoke, as it is harmful for the most part, but if it actually helps them deal with things in ways that medicine has been unable too– who am I to say that they should stop?Also marijuana is also less harmless than nicotine, I believe. It’s mainly because it’s illegal that it’s the problem it is I think…
But about the actual election– I am very pleased with the results. As I said on the previous thread, Mom won tickets to the rally down at Grant park, so we jumped on the L and headed down (heard the good news on the train about his victory– the stations we all dancing, and everyone was cheering). Chicago was a big happy party when we finally got there, all yelling and hugging each other.
And then, we thankfully made it in plenty of time to hear his speech- though we were too far away to see him, we could see the screen and hear him. It was exciting… 125,000 people. Whee…
More about it later, being forced off : P
0
0
-
92
Axa
in November 5th, 2008 @ 23:1691) ahh it totally slipped my mind yesterday to tell you how jealous I was! I definitely want to hear more about that…I heard it was even more people than that but I could be wrong.
0
0
-
93
Ã߀ƒ
in November 5th, 2008 @ 23:2282- I’ve attended both…they have their advantages and disadvantages, but I know that my private school had higher standards and offered much higher material.
Schools: I am opposed to government funded education. Schools should be allowed to take care of themselves. Firstly, we wouldn’t lose any money, because taxes would decrease. Secondly, without government support, schools would have to compete with each other for funds. They would just get better and better. And lastly, we would know for suree that our money is going straight to the school (and not to some greedy bureaucrat dude).
I don’t see this happening, though. I guess we’ll have to live with the way things are.
For hospitals: If people aren’t getting healthcare, why don’t we just build more general hospitals? Everyone will be happy.
“At least let some of us have opportunities!”–I’m basically saying: “It’s better for some to be rich and most to be poor than for none to be rich and all to be poor!!”
I’m not trying to be elitist, but I believe that people who work harder should be rewarded with more opportunities. Everyone should have a right to healthcare and education, but if sacrifices must be made…
Actually, I think a democrat will be good for this country right now. Obama will redistribute the wealth and narrow the gap between the rich and the poor, which has been widening excessively in the past few years. But we can’t have socialism, and we can’t have a total oligarchy, either. We need something in between.
Bleh, I’m just confusing myself. I’ll state my beliefs clearly tomorrow morning.
0
0
-
94
The Bookworm & Lurline (410 piepoints and three B-Day Points and 42 KAG Points! And 5 Wung Points!)
in November 6th, 2008 @ 06:1567 (LtL) -No I’m merely saying that you should fulfill those preresiquites before calling oneself “Pro-Life”.
On Abortion: I’m not saying it’s a good thing, but it’s a choice people should be allowed to make. Well it’s very well to stay abstinent, or to use birth control, but those are not failsafes. Abortion should be legal, as a choice for women to be able to make when nessacary.
On Gay Marriage: Marriage is a right that all people should have. Humans can be attracted, by no fault of their own, (if you consider that a fault), to people of the same gender. I personally see no difference between “Gay Marriage” and “Straight Marriage”. Just because one is more likely that the other doesn’t mean that one is better.
(Also, bonus question: What is the most mistrusted minority group in the USA?)
0
0
-
95
groundhog22
in November 6th, 2008 @ 09:0394 – I’m going to guess gays and lesbians, judging by what you just said.
The only problem that I can see with universalizing health care is a decline in the quality of care. If the doctors are getting paid less (which they will, if they’re getting paid by the government) then they won’t have any incentive to do a good job. Also, there won’t be as many people who would want to become doctors, because the pay will be lousy. The only way around those things that I can see would be for the government to pour a lot of money into the healthcare system. But since when do we have that kind of money?
0
0
-
96
Ã߀ƒ
in November 6th, 2008 @ 09:2895- We don’t, and we’d have to pay a lot of taxes.
0
0
-
97
Armada
in November 6th, 2008 @ 11:0278-Okay, thanks.
0
0
-
98
groundhog22
in November 6th, 2008 @ 11:4496 – Exactly my point.
0
0
-
99
ObamaBiden2012
in November 6th, 2008 @ 14:5230-Sorry it took so long.
Nationalize land.
Nationalize oil drilling, logging, mining co., etc.
Base small towns on the kibbutz/moshav system.
Israel is the most socialist country…
Massively increase education spending to poor areas.
Attack only when we know we can win very quickly.
Invade North Pakistan and talk to their leaders later.
Increase restrictions over TV commercials.
Increase spending to intermediate steps between research and medicine.
0
0
-
100
ObamaBiden2012
in November 6th, 2008 @ 14:58You may think this is socialist or communist. Maybe it is. I’m ready for all the criticism. Bring it on.
0
0
-
101
MissSwann of the Cygnus Isles (Probama!)
in November 6th, 2008 @ 15:1325- *high five* Dude, you rock.
Everyone should have the opportunity to have quality health care.
On Abortion: The main problem with this issue is that there AREN’T AS MANY WOMEN IN THE GOVERNMENT AS MEN. If men could get pregnant, if MEN could have unwanted pregnancies, then abortion would be an entirely new thing. What a woman wants to do with her body should be between her and her doctor, NOT between a bunch of random strangers. I believe that there should be a time limit in which a woman can get an abortion. Say, if a baby is less than 5 months in the uterus, abortion is thumbs up. But more than five, you have to keep it. That way the woman has an option, and the fetuses that are already preactically alive (sucking their thumb on the ultra sound screen, etc) it has a chance to live. But whether a woman has an abortion or not, is (news flash) NONE OF YOUR BUSINESS.
0
0
-
102
♪ Syllabub ♫
in November 6th, 2008 @ 15:16Okay, I don’t really want to take too much part in this thread except for reading it, but let me just say that OBAMA IS NOT A SOCIALIST. It really bothers me that people say that.
0
0
-
103
♪ Syllabub ♫
in November 6th, 2008 @ 15:20SFTDP
101-I totally agree. A woman’s abortion should have nothing to do with the government, only between her and her doctor. I also think thatif a woman purposely gets pregnant, but then finds out it’s a girl/boy and she doesn’t want a girl/boy then she shouldn’t be allowed to get an abortion. But if she was a teenager or something, or got raped, I think a woman should definitely be able to get an abortion.
0
0
-
104
ObamaBiden2012
in November 6th, 2008 @ 15:32Boo Prop 2! Spread their wings?! What were voters thinking?! So they think animals are more important than egg prices or the environment (which will be hurt). Wow.
Note: Chicago is the most segregated city in the country. How come Obama came from there? Please explain.
0
0
-
105
Vendaval
in November 6th, 2008 @ 15:3399 (ObamaBinden2012) – You think invading North Pakistan would help somebody? Maybe arms dealers. And how would you restructure towns? That would lead to mass rioting.
0
0
-
106
The Man For Aeiou
in November 6th, 2008 @ 15:35101- I say abortion in the first trimester is fine. after that, it’s more iffy.
0
0
-
107
ObamaBiden2012
in November 6th, 2008 @ 15:42105-I think if poor people could get a good education, they would.
And about kibbutzim-The idea is that it is a separate, sharing entity, that has collective trade with other towns. Rioting? Maybe. If anyone tried this, they’d be out of office. But there were wars, such as the Revolutionary War, that led to a grand new age. It wasn’t the Rev. War per se that did it, but it started the pattern.
0
0
-
108
Vendaval
in November 6th, 2008 @ 15:47I’m confused, OB2012, are you in favor of, or against Prop 2?
Egg prices probably won’t change, and cruelty to animals is, well, cruel.
Obama grew up in Hawaii, Indonesia, L.A., and later went to school in New York. He worked as a community organizer in Chicago to try to stop segregation.
0
0
-
109
Cliff Eagle
in November 6th, 2008 @ 15:51Cliff Eagle doesn’t care about abortion. If you don’t want a baby, don’t have it. The alternative is killing the baby when it can actually feel stuff. And the terms “legalized murder” are gendered anyways, so don’t use them.
0
0
-
110
Luna the Lovely (11.5 Potterpoints!)
in November 6th, 2008 @ 21:57alright, finally, I can get on! The blog or something has been acting up ever since I got back to my room at 5, and i couldn’t get on till now.
So, I now have a different approach to my frustration over when McCain gave his concession speech (an approach I hadn’t htough of before, but that wil perhaps make people realize I do have a legitimate reason to be upset).
My mother was working the polls that night, and I just talked to her on the phone a little while ago–she said that it was markedly obvious when McCain gave his speech, as what should have been the busiest time of the election, was the time when everybody stopped coming in.
McCain had conceded his defeat, and so nobody saw the point in going and voting. (My mother is, by the way, also mad that McCain didn’t wait until the polls were closed, but more for the reason I am about to mention than for the reason I have previously discussed.) By giving his speech while our polls were still open, right before what is apparently the busiest time at the polls back home, many people who would ordinarily have voted did not, as they figured as the president is already decided, what’s the point?
The point is the senate and house of representatives election. By giving his speech while our polls were open, and thus leading to many people not voting, we will likely see Ted Stevens reappointed (mom says it is very close right now, that he is behind, but not by a lot). As you might know, Stevens is a (very) corrupt politician, on top of just being an idiot. He was recently found guilty of all seven of the felony charges he was facing (I don’t remember what they all were, but you get the idea). Additionally, it meant far less people voted for/against Don Young for the House of Representatives. As you may have heard, Don Young is also a corrupt politician (wow, how shocking), and was recently involved in a scandal with VECO. Unfortunately, it looks like he will once again be elected to the House.
Now, I’m not saying that the outcome of these two elections would have been different had more people come to vote, but given the corruption of both Young and Stevens, this was also an important issue on which to vote–one that many did not vote on, due to the fact that McCain saw fit to give his concession speech before our polls were closed–right before the busiest time at our polls (according to my mom, who has worked numerous elections)–if he had merely waited one hour more–just one measly hour–there would almost certainly have been a much higher voter turnout, as even if the people’s main focus was on voting for the President, once they were at the polls, it is unlikely they would not have voted on the Senate/House of Reps. Thus, McCain’s untimely concession speech had a huge negative effect on voter turnout, and is potentially responsible for the unfortunate reelection of two very corrupt politicians.
Unfortunately, looking for a statistic on voter turnout, it appears that Stevens did indeed win, by a margin of 2% (about 3,000 votes)–close enough that the increased number of voters resulting from McCain having just delayed his speeech ONE MEASLY HOUR could have made a difference. (Young, unfortunately, had a significant lead, unlikely to have been affected by increased voter turnout–can’t blame McCain for that one).
Oh, and as far as people not being awake? As my mother pointed out, anybody who truly cared about the election would have stayed up the extra hour. (The latest this would have made it anywhere in the US would have been midnight, people–not late at all, even for a school night).
From the Washinton Post online: Some observers pointed to Sen. John McCain’s early concession speech as a possible reason for the low turnout — McCain acknowledged Sen. Barack Obama’s win at 7:15 p.m. Alaska time, well before polls closed in the state. An Alaska Republican Party leader told the Fairbanks News-Miner that some voters might have stayed home after hearing Obama had captured the presidency.
And from an article on the Anchorage Daily News’s website: Alaska’s voter turnout numbers won’t be clear until all the absentee ballots are in. But it’s not expected to reach the 66 percent turnout of the last presidential election year, 2004, and there’s dispute over whether it even makes the 60 percent of 2000.
So, perhaps you will now understand that I do have reason to be upset that McCain did not wait one hour more? Like I’ve said beofre, I’m not asking that he have waited until our votes were counted, that would’ve been a bit ridiculous, but he could ahve waited until our polls were CLOSED. Not a huge thing to ask.
0
0
-
111
Zallie
in November 6th, 2008 @ 22:1893 (IBCF) – But if the gov’t isn’t funding education, how will schools get the funds necessary to operate? There’s enough private funding for the private schools we have now, but not enough to support the education of all American students. Most Americans can’t afford private school as it is, so I don’t think this idea is very practical. The gov’t needs to give more money for education, not less.
EVERYONE – can we please use people’s names as well as the post numbers. Especially on a thread that’s moving as fast as this one, just post numbers are confusing.
0
0
-
112
Zallie
in November 6th, 2008 @ 22:23101 (MissSwann) – That isn’t a practical solution. It’s difficult to tell exactly how old a fetus is and it’s something that could easily be faked. Abortions are so rare after a certain point that forbidding them is silly.
0
0
-
113
Raynpho
in November 6th, 2008 @ 22:57101- Hmm, I usually try to stay away from the politics/hot topics threads, they make my brain and senses of reasoning hurt. But I wanted to input something on abortions…
Okay, I think abortions are bad. I won’t get too much into the ethics of it, because I’d probably start going around in circles and tripping all over the place, which would not be good. Basically, though, a baby is a baby, no matter how little it is. And no, siree, we do not like to kill babies. (of course, it all eventually comes down to your definition of a “baby,” but I’d say from the moment of conception. Disagree all you want.) However, abortion should not be made illegal, it really wouldn’t change a thing. People would still get and perform them in the masses, safely, unsafely, whatever stage, whatever reason. I’ll agree with MissSwann there, the government should have absolutely nothing with it, it should come down to only your ethics vs. your choice vs. your doctor’s choice.
So basically, I just extremely disprove of abortions in any situation, but wouldn’t ban it, ever.
0
0
-
114
Axa
in November 6th, 2008 @ 23:55I’m glad prop 2 passed. animals are more important than money– and as for the environment, farm waste causes eutrophication in water, is bad for the air and etc. “Much of the human and environmental harm caused by factory farms comes from the volume of waste that must be stored and disposed of when many animals are continuously confined indoors”
….”The increased numbers of chickens raised for meat and egg production has been identified by the Environmental Protection Agency as one cause of recent rises in greenhouse gas emissions.”
prop 2 has more info. it’s endorsed by many credible environmental agencies, including fierce CA senators Feinstein and Boxer.
0
0
-
115
oxlin
in November 7th, 2008 @ 00:4056- but it is in the rest of the country. I know there are IB schools in more states than MN and I presume that there are immersion schools nation wide too.
0
0
-
116
♫ Agrrrfishi {Aggie}♫
in November 7th, 2008 @ 05:5024- See, I’m all for people using medical marijuana in hopstials. I think it’s great. What I don’t like is that Prop. 1 is allowing people to GROW it in their own backyards. If you ask me, tha is not safe. Even if it were under lock and key, the person could still be robbed and have the key stolen. I think that medicinical marijuana should only be consumed in hospitals or from pharmeceudical perscriptions that are also well hidden and regulated by doctors. It’s no safe to grow it, especially if the victim is a known drug addict. Just trying to keep the world healthy and sane.
0
0
-
117
Rebecca Lasley (Administrator)
in November 7th, 2008 @ 08:32(110) It’s also possible that people saw Obama had already crossed the 270 mark and would have stayed home anyway, whether McCain made his concession or not.
This kind of thing comes up for discussion fairly regularly. For example, one year Florida was called before the polls had closed in the part of the state that’s on Central Time. Recent presidential elections have been more suspenseful, but in the past westerners have complained the outcome is decided before their polls close. It’s too bad people don’t care enough about their own state and local elections enough to vote, regardless of the outcome of the presidential race.
0
0
-
118
Ã߀ƒ
in November 7th, 2008 @ 09:45111 (Zallie)- The private schools are funded by their tuitions. You realize that we do pay for public schools through our taxes, right?
0
0
-
119
ObamaBiden2012
in November 7th, 2008 @ 11:16108-Thanks
Against Prop 2. The environment will be hurt since the chickens will probably be cage free, and that takes more land. Plus, if you go to a store, you will see that Cage Free eggs cost more or give less profit to the producer. The chickens will produce just as much waste as before. Much of the global warming (or human-caused rapid climate change HCRCC) is caused by cows. Let’s tax meat! Besides, Americans eat too much meat (Indiana: 20/21 meals weekly).
0
0
-
120
Zallie
in November 7th, 2008 @ 11:40111 (IBCF) – Yes, I am aware of that fact. I did attend public school for a number of years, you know. But the issue remains that most American families count not afford to send their children to private schools. If the government stopped funding public schools, they would have to charge tuition and many students would not get an education at all. The amount Americans currently pay for public schooling is a fraction of the total amount of taxes they pay, nowhere near the cost of a private school education.
116 (Aggie) –
It’s no safe to grow it, especially if the victim is a known drug addict.
By ‘drug addict’ are you referring to someone who uses marijuana or drugs in general? I am not sure why growing marijuana is so unsafe. Certainly, it is no more dangerous than growing tobacco or brewing alcohol.If people cannot grow it, how do you plan on getting a steady supply for the medical usage you support? As you said, even if the government has it under lock and key, they key could still be stolen!
Just trying to keep the world healthy and sane.
As far as I know, marijuana use does not lead to insanity! The health risks of use are constantly being debated, so I haven’t been able to find a study that convinces me one way or the other. BUT, there are no one has ever died from smoking too much weed and the link between marijuana and cancer is shaky at best.Re: Abortion Debate
Pro-life/anti-choice supporters are always going on about how the unwanted children could always be adopted into a loving home and grow up to be the next Einstein. Which, I suppose, is a possibility, but until pro-life supporters start adopting these children in large numbers, that seems like a hypocritical argument to me. If they so strongly support adoption of children who would otherwise have been aborted in the early stages of pregnancy, why don’t I see pro-life mummies and daddies with large broods of multi-racial adopted children?
117 – Exactly. If the turnout was so low, I would blame it on the Alaskans who aren’t committed to democratic participation, not the fact that McCain conceded. If Alaskans really cared about the election of two corrupt congressmen, they should have voted. As it is, it appears they don’t, so I guess they have to deal with their own mess. Actually, the rest of us have to deal with this mess as well. I cannot believe they got elected!
0
0
-
121
☮iŹ√Ҳ!☮ (400 piepoints 40 brain points, 2 wung points, 7 BP in reserve)☮
in November 7th, 2008 @ 11:44Elections.
Rock on,
OBAMA and BIDEN!!
Got that out. I’m glad McCain didn’t win, but his concession speech was very polite. I was a bit POed at the crowd, though. Geez, it’s a not a war between candidates, to all you McCain supporters. McCain did a nice job with his speech, though.
0
0
-
122
ObamaBiden2012
in November 7th, 2008 @ 11:49I found it out! Concession speeches only matter if there would otherwise be a recount. So we don’t need to argue.
0
0
-
123
JFTISG
in November 7th, 2008 @ 11:53I just wish that I could give “McPain” some PhantoPhobia.*
* PhantoPhobia: Fear of Ghosts.
0
0
-
124
Luna the Lovely (11.5 Potterpoints!)
in November 7th, 2008 @ 12:39117, 120–Well, I disagree with your analysis of why few Alaskans turned out to vote. However, it won’t do any of us any good to continue debating it. Just one last note, I think Alaskans do care about participating in elections, and exercising their democratic rights, but I know that if I had seen the election called by McCain before I had voted, I would not have been thinking about the fact that there were other issues on the ballot (namely senatorial/house of rep elections), but would have been thinking, “It’s the presidential election, the president is already elected, what’s the point?” I’m not saying I wouldn’t have voted anyway (not that it would’ve been an issue, I will be voting absentee for the next eight years for the duration of my college life), but I know that unless somebody had pointed it out to me, that I wouldn’t have remembered that there were very important state elections going on simultaneously on the same ballot, and I wouldn’t be surprised if this was true in the case of people who ordinarily would ahve voted but did not. I don’t think it is due to their lack of interest in the election or their lack of interest in exercising their democratic rights. I don’t think that was it at all.
And as for your comment, Zallie, that you cannot believe Stevens and Young were reelected, well, I am quite disappointed as well–I didn’t vote for either, but instead voted for the challenging democrats. At least the election between Stevens and his opponent was very close, around 3,000 (just a third of the size of my home “city” which is by no means large at 10,000), suggesting to me that there is a good chance he will not be reelected again. Hopefully.
As far as Don Young, jeez, I think he’s been in office since before I was even born–damn, I just googled it–he’s been in office since ’73–that’s
35 years. Jeez. So, his reelection is probably due in part to the fact that many have never known anyone else. Wow, that’s scary, dad would’ve been 18 back then, only in AK for a couple/few years, and mom wouldn’t’ve even moved to AK yet (she met dad at college in Oregon)….That’s a LONG time, and if you ask me, even if he weren’t corrupt, it’s time for a change…..But, yes, I am very disappointed that so many people would vote to reelect the both of them, and although i can (perhaps falsely) attribute Stevens win to low voter turnout, the win of both of them is also probably due in aprt to the fact that Ak is a very Republican minded state (I think we’ve only voted for one democratic president in the 50 yrs we’ve been a state–now that’s a scary thought, my parents were born before AK became a state–although nto before it became a territory),a nd as Stevens and Young are both Republicans.
Not that that’s an excuse, but…..
0
0
-
125
ObamaBiden2012
in November 7th, 2008 @ 14:57When my dad ran for Congress, his opponent said my dad wanted to legalize marijuana, but he left out one word (medical). Plus he said my dad wanted to tax every one and every thing, which was (pretty much) true. Who doesn’t want to tax stuff?
0
0
-
126
Vendaval
in November 7th, 2008 @ 15:16OB2012(125)-Most people don’t want to be taxed, because they like to have more money for themselves. And/or they oppose government intervention in people’s private lives.
Marijuana:
I’m with Zallie on this, but I think parallels could be made to abortion: even if it is illegal, it will still be done. It is done, if it’s for medical use at least there will be a system in place to govern it.Prop. 2:
There will be less sewage because there will be less animals. People and animals’ health will be preserved. Animal cruelty is unacceptable. Food will be safer. Family farms are supported. The LA Times says egg prices are unlikely to rise. Prop 2 is supported by:
the Sierra Club, Clean Water Action, Environmental Integrity Project, Consumer Federation of America, Center for Food Safety, Silicon Valley Toxics Coalition, Center for Science in the Public Interest, Union of Concerned Scientists, California Veterinary Medical Association, The Humane Society of the United States
0
0
-
127
Vetrlidi
in November 7th, 2008 @ 15:26about voter turnout- I think the reason why the U.S. has a lower turnout than other countries is because other countries have popular vote. People who live in a state that is overwhelmingly democrat or republican might feel that their vote doesn’t matter. When I asked several of my teachers if they voted in the 2000 election, many said they didn’t because their vote wouldn’t matter.
0
0
-
128
Rebecca Lasley (Administrator)
in November 7th, 2008 @ 16:37(127) A recent experiment suggested that voter participation would increase dramatically simply if you knew your neighbors were aware of whether you voted or not.
0
0
-
129
MissSwann of the Cygnus Isles (Probama!)
in November 7th, 2008 @ 18:29112- Doctors (there’s that word again; NOT government officials) can tell how old a child is when ITW (in the womb) by ultrasound and other technologies. Therefore a deadline can be decided upon.
113- YES! Bingo! EXACTLY how I feel. It should be up to the woman and what she feels is right. You can have the right to not like it, but it’s not your decision.
121- I know! McCain was being all nice and ethical and polite and then the stupid crowd people had to boo.On Animal Cruelty: Cruelty to anything is wrong. End of story.
0
0
-
130
Eragon
in November 7th, 2008 @ 20:00OBAMA WON!!!! YAAAAY!
0
0
-
131
Vetrlidi
in November 7th, 2008 @ 20:1699- forcing everyone to change doesn’t work well. And given that most small towns are conservative, you would run into real trouble there.
I guess that you are suggesting preventing the Taliban from using Pakistan as a base by invading, but really the U.S. already has done that. Recently I read in the news that they bombed a wedding party thinking it was an insurgent base. Pakistan is already unhappy with the U.S., and has asked that the U.S. stop such raids.Animal Cruelty is wrong, but a federal law should be passed instead of state laws. If a state law is passed, then the farmers in that region would go bankrupt from inter-state competition from farmers who are doing the same cruel things that just got banned in that state.
0
0
-
132
The Man For Aeiou
in November 7th, 2008 @ 22:40*Loves http:// www. change .gov/ *
That’s obama site. I also like the rest of the Goverment sites.
*Goes to try to find something*
*can’t find it in the sites.*
*Bummed*
0
0
-
133
Zallie
in November 7th, 2008 @ 22:56129 (MissSwann) – Within a certain range, yes, doctors can tell the approximate age of a fetus/infant. However, they can’t tell the exact age of the child. (If you have any evidence to the contrary, please tell me.) There are a lot of ways the age of the fetus could be faked, the woman could like about her last period, the last time she had sex, the fetus could be underdeveloped for its age etc. That idea is just not practical. There are very few abortions after the first trimester anyway, so working to forbid abortions after a certain date would only pertain to a few percentages of women seeking abortions. Your solution couldn’t be effectively implemented.
And banning the abortions would just drive women to seek unsafe treatment, not eliminate abortions. The women could still get abortions, but the risks of infection etc are much higher. Especially if only abortions after a certain date are illegal, the women who are seeking illegal abortion would be further along in pregnancy and therefore the abortion process is more dangerous and difficult.
0
0
-
134
♫ Agrrrfishi {Aggie}♫
in November 8th, 2008 @ 13:4149- CHILL OUT. You need to cool down, and keep negative opinions to yourself. just because someone has different thoughts and opinions than you do does not make them communistic.
120- Well, at least if the government grows it, it’s going to be more secure. And I guarentee nobody’s crazy enough to try and steal any weed from the government building, no mtter how realistic National Treasure may seem. Also,I don’t know where you’re from, but marijuana can mess with your mind and permanently impare it. Believe me, I know. My uncle was a drug addict and he did pot too, which had terrible results on my aunt and cousins. Marijuana does make people sick, and it does make people crazy too.
0
0
-
135
Vendaval
in November 8th, 2008 @ 15:39But people will steal weed from the government. People are pretty crazy, and security can’t be that high. (I’m constantly scared by how loose security is in many places.) It would be treated like any other prescription medication, which would then be delivered through pharmacies. Cindy McCain stole prescription medication from her own charity when she was addicted to drugs.
Medically, a study published in The Lancet found cannabis to be both less addictive and less physically harmful than tobacco.
0
0
-
136
♫ Agrrrfishi {Aggie}♫
in November 8th, 2008 @ 17:26If you’re suggesting that government security is loose, I don’t know what you’ve been hearing. And no, the entire point of the proposition was to allow people to grow the actuall weed in their own homes, not as a perscription and certainly no as safe. The doctor would provide them with the plant, and they would be prmitted to grow it in their backyards. That is unsafe on SO many levels, I can’t even begin to explain.
0
0
-
137
Zallie
in November 8th, 2008 @ 19:36134, 136 – (Aggie) – And I guarentee nobody’s crazy enough to try and steal any weed from the government…”
Girl, where have you been living? People steal things from the government all the time. I guarantee you, if the government grew pot, people could still steal it.
My uncle was a drug addict and he did pot too, which had terrible results on my aunt and cousins.
If he was a real drug addict, smoking some weed was the least of his problems. I doubt it helped the matter, but it’s illogical to blame his problems on weed.
Marijuana does make people sick, and it does make people crazy too.
That’s funny, because I haven’t been able to find a single study linking marijuana use and insanity. The most common side effect is increased appetite, which while annoying, is not very severe.
I fail to see how permitting patients to grow their own medicinal marijuana is so unsafe. It is certainly no less safe than having the government grow it, and possibly safer, because the people growing it won’t have to process it or treat it with any sort of chemicals for preservation.
0
0
-
138
♫ Agrrrfishi {Aggie}♫
in November 8th, 2008 @ 20:15It’s not illogical to blame problems on drugs. That is the most common cause of what gets people INTO poblems these days. It’s also clear that while it might be convenient for these people to grow their own crack, but that’s not to say they could peddle it off for money. You really have no idea what some people will do for money these days, especially where I live. I’ve heard of sons selling their mothers’ jewelry and perscription medicines, people scamming their neighbors, murder, drugs, sex, anything to live. Who’s to say that the patient wouldn’t peddle the weed if they got more of a profit from selling than from buying or receiving, when they could just get more? Let’s face it: the world is falling apart over the dollar. Every day is a race to earn another, and another, until we’re all spent and there’s no reason left to earn. Neighbors hurt neighbors, friends hurt friends, families fall apart, and at the center of it is drugs and money. It’s not safe to leave those things hanging around where just anybody could get at them. Maybe you just haven’t been looking hard enough to find evidence that weed won’t actually hurt the patients more than itwill help them, and the people around them too.
0
0
-
139
Luna the Lovely (11.5 Potterpoints!)
in November 8th, 2008 @ 21:08138–Um, Aggie, you say that “It’s also clear that while it might be convenient for these people to grow their own crack…..”
Well, I believe the topic at hand was growing marijuana. Marijuana and crack are not the same thing–crack is slang for cocaine, which is a totally different drug than marijuana, not to mention, I don’t think you can grow crack.
Now, I’m not saying medicinal marijuana is a good thing, (nor am I saying it’s bad) but your last comment implies that you believe that crack and marijuana are the same drug. But they’re not, and unless I’m much mistaken, crack is a lot more harmful than marijuana is, and crack can lead to insanity (so, this might explain why you think marijuana leads to insanity, since you appear to think they are synonymous).
And if you don’t htink they’re synonymous and that was just a “typo”, then, sorry for the rant/lecture/whatever you wanna call it.
0
0
-
140
Zallie
in November 8th, 2008 @ 21:33138 (Aggie) – Don’t put words in my mouth. I never said it was illogical to blame problems on drugs. I stated that it was illogical for your drug-addict uncle to blame his problems on weed alone. You said:
“My uncle was a drug addict and he did pot too,”
Which I took to mean he did other drugs in addition to marijuana. If he was really a serious addict, as I said above, smoking some weed was the least of his problems. Now, I don’t know exactly what your uncle was addicted to in addition to weed, but whatever it was is probably much more dangerous than weed, which is generally considered a “soft” drug. I doubt smoking up helped the situation, but you can’t blame his problems solely on marijuana, which you are trying to do.
“You really have no idea what some people will do for money these days, especially where I live.”
I wouldn’t make assumptions like that, if I were you. I live in a working-class neighborhood of Chicago. Where do you live? I’m pretty sure I’m just as aware of inner-city issues as you are.
“It’s not safe to leave those things hanging around where just anybody could get at them.”
People can get at drugs anywhere. This is not a valid argument.
“Maybe you just haven’t been looking hard enough to find evidence that weed won’t actually hurt the patients more than itwill help them, and the people around them too.”
Let me point out what you said earlier:
“See, I’m all for people using medical marijuana…”
Pick a side. Either you support medical marijuana usage or you “haven’t been looking hard enough” to find evidence that weed will hurt patients. You can’t play both sides of this argument.
Also, as Luna pointed out crack=/=weed. They are two VERY different drugs, and certainly shouldn’t be compared in an argument.
And one more thing. Can you please refer to specific post numbers AND the poster’s name? I’m assuming you’re responding to me, but I don’t know for sure!
0
0
-
141
Red-tailed HAWK
in November 8th, 2008 @ 22:1493 (IBCF)-I understand your logic somewhat, but not completely. Yes, people who work harder should be rewarded with better pay and more opportunities. However, I think this can only be taken so far. From what I understand, president-elect Obama plans to potentially increase taxes on those who make more than $250,000 a year. Now, if you would kindly think about it this way: somebody making minimum wage ($6.55 an hour) who worked 8 hours per day, 5 days per week, for even all 52 weeks of the year, would make $13,624. This hardly seems like enough to live on. Now, if someone made minimum wage and worked 24 hours a day, 7 days a week, 52 weeks a year, en would make $57,220.80. It would be physically impossible to work 24/7, obviously.
Also, to earn $250,000 working at minimum wage, you would need to work for 38,167 hours, or roughly 4 1/3 years. Non-stop, 24/7.
Also consider that someone making $250,000 per year earns about $120 an hour.
Thus, it seems fairly clear to me that people making minimum wage, or anything close to it, deserve a break. Can you honestly say to me that one person is worth 2 dollars for every minute while another is worth only 2 cents? Can you say it’s the poor person’s fault for being poor when they barely stay alive, trying to buy food and medicine and clothes for their kids on a meager $6.55 an hour? Can you say it’s their fault they are in their situation? Surely some aren’t working hard, but if one was born into a poor family, and grew up going to public school (which you seem to find so disgusting), and went out and couldn’t afford college, though en desperately wanted to go, en would go out into the world with no college education and no money, looking for work. En would only be hired for jobs making minimum wage, and thus en suffers because en can barely afford to eat. Is this en’s fault? Can you blame en for coming from a poor family? For not having money to go to college, though having the drive to? For not getting a decent education, though you took away funding for public schools? Is it en’s fault en can then only make minimum wage, and thus barely scrape by in poverty?
This is where I lose track of your logic.
Red-tailed HAWK
0
0
-
142
Zallie
in November 8th, 2008 @ 22:39141 (Red Tailed HAWK) – Who is this ‘en’ you keep referring to? I have never heard this term before!
0
0
-
143
Zinc the sorceress and Leafygreen {One blogiversery point, two b-day points}
in November 8th, 2008 @ 22:44142- En- noun: A word for someone of a neutral, undecided, or unknown gender. En grabbed my shoulder, en’s face hidden by en’s hood.
Ta da!
0
0
-
144
Red-tailed HAWK
in November 8th, 2008 @ 22:47142-I believe it is a museblogger term that means “he or she.” Forgive me if I have it wrong, I am not sure of how to use all of those terms/phrases/etc.
I didn’t want to use “he” of course, and I didn’t like having a bunch of “they”s in there, so I went in and put in a bunch of “ens” Did the argument itself make sense?
Red-tailed HAWK
0
0
-
145
Robert Coontz (Administrator)
in November 8th, 2008 @ 22:49I hear that at Oberlin College they use the pronoun “ze” for that purpose, but “en” has become a MuseBlog tradition, and I prefer it. “Ze” reminds me of someone trying to fake a French accent.
0
0
-
146
Luna the Lovely (11.5 Potterpoints!)
in November 8th, 2008 @ 23:01141–$6.55? I guess that must be either the federal minimum wage, or else your home state’s minimal wage? Back home in Alaska, minimum wage is $7.50, but it seems I remember hearing that AK has one of the highest minimum wages in the ocuntry…..
0
0
-
147
Vendaval
in November 8th, 2008 @ 23:31138 (Aggie) – Addiction is a very bad thing, and it does lead to people doing terrible things to survive. Marijuana, however, as stated before, is both less addictive and less harmful than both tobacco and alcohol. At least six states allow you to grow your own plants, but they have maximums on the number of plants.
No problems.
The Netherlands have a very loose policy concerning cannabis possession, and they haven’t lost their country yet. They were able to see a difference between soft and hard drugs, you can buy marijuana in coffee shops that don’t sell alcohol.Crack (cocaine) is an ultra-refined form of cocoa leaves. The leaves themselves are chewed to relieve the symptoms of altitude sickness, but they need to go through several stages in laboratory settings to become cocaine.
If you’re suggesting that government security is loose, I don’t know what you’ve been hearing.
This is only slightly related to what we’re talking about, but I don’t know why you think government security is very strong. A website went up explaining how easy it is to generate a false pass and get onto an airline undetected. What happened? The rules weren’t changed, the smart guy who created the website was threatened with arrest. Same thing happened with a website where it was shown how easy it would be to tamper with NYC’s water supply. Neither have been fixed.
Both candidates’ campaigns have been hacked, numerous senators’ computers, and last year the Pentagon had computers taken offline for 3 weeks after a Chinese hack. The Department of Homeland Security was hacked last year too, most departments receive low grades under the Federal Information Security Management Act. What have you seen of strong government security?
0
0
-
148
Zallie
in November 8th, 2008 @ 23:32143-145. Oh, okay. I’d always heard ‘ze’ but ‘en’ works too. Musers must have come up with it after I left. Thanks, guys.
0
0
-
149
Luna the Lovely (11.5 Potterpoints!)
in November 9th, 2008 @ 01:27147–To add to your comment about how easy it is to get onto an airplane undetected, I personally find government security lax as far as what items they allow you to bring on a plane and those they don’t. I mean, I, personally, can think of at least a dozen ways to kill somebody on an airplane (and perhaps hijack it), without smuggling any contraband on board. Seriously, just using everyday items, I can think of ways to kill, and with just a little bit of creativity, I can think of an easy way to make a “knife” without any metal whatsoever, which could therefore be smuggled on your body through security–foolproof, unless you manage to get yourself strip searched–or, more accurately, patted down as they feel you up in all sorts of ways……
And yes, I’ve gotten that lovely VIP treatment once, when I was fifteen, somehow me my sis and mom were all randomly selected for the treatment……yeah, girls, do yourself a favor and don’t wear an underwire bra, or they choose to pay extra special attention to that part of your anatomy, as they run their hands along it to make sure it’s just your bra……
Anyway, yeah, I don’t really feel like going into any specifics of what you could “smuggle” through government airport security, as I wouldn’t want to give ideas to anybody, but suffice to say they are numerous, and don’t require much thought or intelligence……
0
0
-
150
Axa
in November 9th, 2008 @ 01:34147) …it is so ridiculous that 1) there were hacks to begin with and 2) that they were so recent. I mean really.
most hackers just do it for kicks anyway, which makes it all the more pathetic. just think about someone who has actual malicious intent and then we’ll be in a real mess.
0
0
-
151
♫ Agrrrfishi {Aggie}♫
in November 9th, 2008 @ 08:10140- Sorry for the confusion, it’s just that I usually post my comments either directly after or close to when someone is making their opposing argument. I apologize for the confusion.
Also, I thought I had made myself clear about this. I want people to use marijuana for MEDICINE, however, I don’t want them to be able to grow it themselves because i deem this process unsafe. I live in Detroit. That’s about as unsafe as you can get. I just don’t think it’s a good idea for more marijuana or drug expose than is needed.
0
0
-
152
Zallie
in November 9th, 2008 @ 08:32151 (Aggie) – Yes, so you’ve said. However, you’ve failed the respond the points I made in post 140, or Luna’s post (139). You keep saying the same things over and over again, but you’ve still haven’t pointed out why it is so unsafe for patients to grow their own marijuana.
It’s the easiest solution for all parties involved. The patients have a fresh, untreated supply available whenever they need it, and it’s one less thing for our overtaxed govt to deal with. They can enforce government checks, but don’t actually have to grow it themselves.
Detroit may have high crime and violence levels, but that has nothing to do with what we are currently talking about: drug use.
0
0
-
153
♫ Agrrrfishi {Aggie}♫
in November 9th, 2008 @ 12:36152- *sigh* I really don’t understand how you haven’t noticed the MANY points I’ve made attributing t why it is unsafe to grow marijuana: selling for moeny, improper use, higher probability that someone will try to steal it, etc, etc. It might be easy, but it’s not risk free. Although, as Vendeval puts it, marijuana is “less addictive and less harmful” by the slightest smaller margin, this does not under any circumstances make it any less dangerous than other drugs. And might I point out that you were the one who asked me where I lived in he first place, and, yes, Detroit does have notorious drug and hustling standards as well as violence an crime. I guess since you feel that I have nothing new to say, we might as well stop talking about it.
The whole point is, it’s over. In the words of Hamlet, “What’s done is done.” I mean, I might not be happy with the outcome of some of the points in this election, but when it comes down to it, the only thing that really matters is that we all stay together as a country. Barack Obama is going to be our president, whether we like it or not. If anything, what I’m most happy with in this election is that America has taken such a big step forward from racial differences. I”m glad to see that we’ve left that all behind us. We’ve come a long way since slavery and Jim Crow laws. However, I do fear for Obama and his family, since it’s true that the world is not completely free from racial tension. He made us promises. Now all he has to do is keep them.
0
0
-
154
♫ Agrrrfishi {Aggie}♫
in November 9th, 2008 @ 12:39No, wait. Sorry. “What’s done is done” is Macbeth. (I’m taking a Shakespeare class and we’ve been studying both.
)
0
0
-
155
ObamaBiden2012
in November 9th, 2008 @ 15:42Animal cruelty? Actually, these are animals, not people. And anyway, animals cannot be put in front of people. Animal experiments are allowed. they should be. So should putting chickens into cages that they cannot spread their wings in. And as for the LA Times, I guess they’re wrong. Ask any farmer. Of course, you aren’t farmers who will see profits cut.
0
0
-
156
Luna the Lovely (11.5 Potterpoints!)
in November 9th, 2008 @ 16:09155–Actually, people are animals, too, so saying “these are animals, not people” is just absurd. And what makes us better than any other animals? Because we’ve proven to be a remarkably invasive species, able to take over and push out native species wherever we go? Or are you going by sheer numbers? Because if you are going by numbers, then invertebrates win out–vertebrates, including mammals, reptiles, and birds, make up only 3% of all animals on Earth, and humans are only a small portion of that 3%.
As for animal experimentation, I don’t deny that, being a typical human, I think it more ethical to experiment on animals. Animal experimentation allows us to make medical discoveries that can be used to help not only people, but other animals, too.
However, I don’t think needless cruelty, as in confining chickens to cages in which they cannot even spread their wings, should be allowed. It’s cruel and wrong and there are no arguable benefits to that sort of thing. Animal experimentation, yes, i can see the argument for it, and understand it, and for the most part even agree. But needless cruelty, no. Even if the animals are just being raise to be killed, they should at least be treated decently until their death, and then killed humanely, so that they do not suffer significantly.
0
0
-
157
MissSwann of the Cygnus Isles (Probama!)
in November 9th, 2008 @ 17:25133- Well, there is a procedure in which doctors take samples of the uteral fluid that can tell the sex, age, and date of conception of the child. I can’t remember specifics, I learned about it a long time ago. But I do see your argument.
On Marijuana: Marijuana has medical qualities. And it’s also true that people can get addicted to it. SOLUTION: Have the medical worlde (industry? you get the picture) moniter the use of marijuana so it can be used safely and medically.On Airplane Safety: Yes, it’s true that there needs to be security on airplanes, but there also needs to be a better system for allowing/not allowing people on airplanes. In every airport today, there is a ‘no-fly’ list; the people behind the desks type in the person’s name, and if the name is connected to a person deemed with having terrorist suspicion, they are not allowed to fly until extensive searches are made onto the person. My father is on the no-fly list. He had to wait a full 24 hours to fly on a plane back from DC while security dudes rifled through his suitcases, his clothing, even taking apart his pens to see if they contained gunpowder. My father is on the no-fly list because his surname is Hayden. (GAPAs; that is not my surname. My mother kept her last name when they married and I inherited hers. So no one can stalk me. And he gave me permission to use his name). If you search the name Hayden on any website, you come up with about a million options. Including the terrorist with the surname Hayden. Even people with a name as generic as John Smith have to put up with this, just because a terrorist is named John Smith. Why am I ranting about this? Because I think it’s ridiculous.
0
0
-
158
Amelia Peabody
in November 9th, 2008 @ 17:50(155)-Actually, cramming animals into cages has actually caused individual farmers profits to go down. The overabundance of meat
causes it price and quality to drop. The “efficiency” that this creates allows big corporations to take over with CAFO’s that raise genetically engineered chickens which can hardly stand up because their chests are so large.
Happy chickens, chickens that have ran around and eaten bugs taste better. But they also are better for the farmer. He can charge more for his chicken, which people will buy. In addition, he won’t have to pay for as much feed. The profits are even higher if he(of she) say, grows a little corn and other vegetable or raises other animals. The interrelationships between farm animals and plants can make a farm a well profiting company.
It’s this emphasis on mono culture and crop yields that really has hurt farmers.
0
0
-
159
OB2012
in November 9th, 2008 @ 17:51156-Are animals conscious? to some extent, but they do not know what cages are. What about wolf cubs? the are kept in tiny caves by their mother when they are young. Should we rescue them? No. And it’s not needless cruelty. Humans are more important since we are the ones who are this civilization. And as for the argument that people are animal, thats just like saying Arabs ae Semitic, so they cannot be Anti-Semitic.Of course, I am not saying that you are a radical Arab, I am just drawing a parallel.
0
0
-
160
Vendaval
in November 9th, 2008 @ 17:58The no-fly list has never caught a terrorist, or anyone else worth catching. It’s a very sorry state of affairs.
People are animals. I’m not sure you understand the full extent of how cruel these farms can be. The LA Times is not just simply “wrong.”
marijuana is “less addictive and less harmful†by the slightest smaller margin, this does not under any circumstances make it any less dangerous than other drugs.
Actually, that’s exactly the opposite of what I meant, it is less dangerous than other drugs due to its less addictive and harmful nature. It is of course a drug, and anything that alters how people act is dangerous, but I am saying it is far less worse than crack, tobacco, or even alcohol.
0
0
-
161
Amelia Peabody
in November 9th, 2008 @ 18:02159-Chickens aren’t wolves. And only very young wolves are kept in sheltered places, which sometimes aren’t very tiny at all. They have plenty of time to run around, play wrestle and do all sorts of things.
The chicken are crammed in cages until they are ready to be killed. Their beaks are sawed off so they cannot kill each other.
And animals are certainly aware of what cages are. Chimpanzees, which are very intelligent, get extremely depressed when locked in cages.
0
0
-
162
Luna the Lovely (11.5 Potterpoints!)
in November 9th, 2008 @ 18:07159–yes, animals are conscious, and yes they know what cages are. It is absurd to say they don’t. Take, for instance, a dog. Do they like being caged up? No. You can train a dog to tolerate it, but it won’t like it. The same goes for any animal. Have you ever tried to get an animal into a cage? I guarantee you the animal will fight you, because it does not like small enclosed spaces where it feels helpless. saying that an animal doesn’t know what a cage is is absolutely untrue.
And your argument with the wolf cubs? Sure, they might be in a small cage when they are very, very young, but that is to protect them. When you were young, your mother probably kept you in a crib so you couldn’t wander off and get hurt. She didn’t let you freely wander around outside, or up and down stairs. But when the cubs are older, they are allowed to roam freely, so that they can get exercise and be healthy, normal wolves, same as when you are older, you are let out of your cage. The cubs are not imprisoned all their lives, like you are saying chickens and such should be. It is completely and wholly different. An absurd argument.
And no, humans are NOT more important by any means. I’d like to see you make a human civilization that doesn’t require animals. If it weren’t for so-called lesser animals, humans would not be able to survive. We rely on animals for damn near everything in life. Without animals, we are nothing. so don’t tell me that “we are the ones who are this civilization.”
And people are animals. Prove me wrong, if you can.
There are also plenty of other highly intelligent organisms. Squid, for one, are very smart. They are the most intelligent of all invertebrates, and posses remarkable problem solving skills. Monkeys, gorillas, and other primates (which, by the way, humans are as well: Order Primata) are also very intelligent, possessing advanced problem solving skills and the ability to use tools.
0
0
-
163
MissSwann of the Cygnus Isles (Probama)
in November 9th, 2008 @ 20:00On Animal Expirimentation: Before I go off into a long rant/spaz, I just want to let everyone reading this know that I am not disgusted by animal expirimentation itself; merely by the way scientists carry out such expiriments.
Animals are kept in tiny cages with minimal food and water, and they are hardly ever cleaned out. They sleep on top of piles of their own feces. Every day they are taken out and injected with various drugs, shampooed with harmful chemicals, shaved, operated on, and all together tortured until their short lives blissfully end. And these animals are not just rats and mice; they are horses, pigs, cows, rabbits, monkeys, dogs, and cats. They are forced into and out of their cages each day using abusive force, and are usually shot if they do not obey. Think about that. Now think about this; animal testing is technically not necessary. With today’s rapidly expanding technologies, tests have been developed that eliminate testing on any living organism, Homo Sapiens or otherwise. Animal cruelty is unnecessary and wrong, and it absolutely sickens me that it still occurs with all of these alternate options.
0
0
-
164
Robert Coontz (Administrator)
in November 9th, 2008 @ 20:25(162) Luna: As I understand it, squid are not particularly bright, but octopuses are.
0
0
-
165
Luna the Lovely (11.5 Potterpoints!)
in November 9th, 2008 @ 20:34164–My bio prof said that cephalopods are very smart, and then told some anecdotal story about the squid eating the fish (the squid that I could’ve sworn was an octopus, so…..), so the implication was that squid were smart. Of course, he was also telling the class that all mosquitoes eat blood, which, unless I have been told wrong all my life, is not true. 1) only female mosquitoes suck blood, and 2) they do not eat the blood, but use it to feed their babies/eggs. Although, that doesn’t quite make sense, now that I think about it, as mosquitoes, like all insects (or most anyway), use external fertilization…..Huh, I don’t know anymore.
Well, thinks for pointing that out! Of course, substituting squid with octopi still gives the same idea……just more accurately!
0
0
-
166
♫ Agrrrfishi {Aggie}♫
in November 9th, 2008 @ 20:42Octopi can open jars with teir tentacles and tell what color things are. Squids, on the other hand… wel, I’ve never heard of a squid doing anything but squirting ink.
I hate animal experimentation. It’s evil, and it’s wrong. That’s why I joined PETA.
0
0
-
167
Luna the Lovely (11.5 Potterpoints!)
in November 9th, 2008 @ 20:47166–well, maybe he meant octopi, but said squid, but yeah, I knew octopi were smart. Come to think of it, I do remember him specifically calling octopi smart (cuz I remembered the octopus, Weber, that tried to eat my sister, hehehe), but I htought his fish story involved squid, but maybe I got confused.
Oh, and Weber, well, at this aquarium place in Oregon, we were allowed to touch this one octopus, Weber, who was in a tank. So, we were supposed to wash our hands and what not efore reaching in and touching him, so at least half a dozen of us on the tour group touched him, including me, but when my sister put her arm in, before anybody really had a chance to proces it, he had reached up and latched on with his tentacles at elast up to her elbow, and the woman supervising had to pull him off. It was really funny.
As far as PETA, well, I don’t deny that animals should be treated more humanely, but I htink PETA goes a bit over board. I mean, human milk in ice cream? What on earth were they thinking? I would give up ice cream altogether if they got their way on that.
0
0
-
168
Taiwan Hippo Fan
in November 9th, 2008 @ 21:02It’s chephalopods in general, actually. Cuttlefish aren’t quite as brilliant, but they’re all right. That was a great article.
0
0
-
169
JFTISG
in November 10th, 2008 @ 08:31Hey, I’m with PETA- People for the Eating of Tasty Animals!
Of course, I don’t eat dogs, cats or octopus.
0
0
-
170
MissSwann of the Cygnus Isles
in November 10th, 2008 @ 09:33169- *dryly* That’s what my dad says.
I used to be a vegetarian, but now I’m not. I only eat meat with the ASPCA Sticker of Approval on it.
0
0
-
171
Luna the Lovely (11.5 Potterpoints!)
in November 10th, 2008 @ 10:34170–my dad, too. Except just the first part. (I’m not saying he eats dogs or cats, he just doesn’t say he doesn’t).
0
0
-
172
OB2012
in November 10th, 2008 @ 11:11Guys. WE ARE ANIMALS. For the purposes of this it really doesn’t matter. Are cats “better” than songbirds? Not necessarily, but they eat them. When it comes to treatment of OTHER animals, might is right, but we don’t need to cause NEEDLESS cruelty. The environment and HCGCC will not really be affected. Someone along the chain of farmers, retailers, and consumers will be at least minorly hurt. But the thing that I just can’t argue about is the cruelty. I think this discussion is over.
0
0
-
173
shadowfire
in November 10th, 2008 @ 13:19Ooh, colorful!
In Obama’s speech, he said something along the lines of “I can’t fix all of our problems in four years, but I’m going to turn us around.” Any comments?
0
0
-
174
KaiYves
in November 10th, 2008 @ 13:35167- An octopus grabbing her arm up to the elbow? She’s brave. I would have just died on the spot from fear.
0
0
-
175
MissSwann of the Cygnus Isles (Probama)
in November 10th, 2008 @ 13:55173- Honestly, I think he was trying to tell us that America is so ****** up right now that no one can fix us in 4 measley years, but he’s going to turn us around so the next president after him has a good start on fixing more of our problems.
174- I would have been lik ‘ewww… it’s squishy… AHH IT TICKLES GETITOFFGETITOFFGETITOFF…’
0
0
-
176
Luna the Lovely (11.5 Potterpoints!)
in November 10th, 2008 @ 14:20174–I think it took her so much by surprise that she didn’t know how to react. All of the rest of us were laughing so hard, though, and taking pictures, while the woman at the aquarium was ripping it’s tentacles off her arm, warning her that she might have ruptured vessels (as in, she might have bruises, which she didn’t). It was so funny! I’m just glad Weber didn’t think I was lunch, though!
0
0
-
177
Logogeo96
in November 10th, 2008 @ 16:29OOOOOOOOOOBBBBBBBBBBAAAAAAAAAMMMMMMAAAAAA!
0
0
-
178
Zallie
in November 10th, 2008 @ 18:09153 (Aggie) – The risks you mention also come with government grown marijuana. Security would be just as big of an issue, if not a larger one. Corruption is (unfortunately) always present in government as well, so there would be pressure to leak information, products etc. It’s impractical to say that you only support growth of medicinal marijuana if the government does it, because the risks are just as high. Either you support it, or you don’t, but qualifying the conditions in which you support it makes little difference, because the risks still exist.
“this does not under any circumstances make it any less dangerous than other drugs.”
Marijuana is much safer than other, harder drugs. The jury is still out on whether it’s even addictive. The side effects are comparatively mild (increased appetite (pot) vs. increased blood pressure to a fatal degree (cocaine)) and there are no records of anyone every dying from an overdose unlike most other commonly used drugs.157 (MissSwann) – I’m skeptical of that procedure being able to tell the exact age of a fetus. Even if it were possible, the technology isn’t widely available. There are many areas in the US were there are large amounts of unplanned pregnancies that do not have access to healthcare of that level.
0
0
-
179
The Man For Aeiou
in November 10th, 2008 @ 20:51What do people think about youth voting rights?
0
0
-
180
Brendan The Science Whiz/Fforde Ffan (37 Brain Points)
in November 10th, 2008 @ 20:5494: Atheists.
0
0
-
181
groundhog22
in November 10th, 2008 @ 21:37179 – I think it’s a good idea, because if highschoolers, hypothetically, would be able to vote, then they would vote right at school, and would get into the habit of voting.
0
0
-
182
Axa
in November 10th, 2008 @ 21:55I strongly believe that the voting age should remain at eighteen. While it might instill the habit of voting as groundhog pointed out, I have observed that many high school students have political opinions that are either reiterations of their parents’ beliefs or trivial in nature.
While I myself would be overjoyed at the idea of voting, I don’t believe it a practical move. As a minor, a high school student is still dependent upon their parents, and therefore several issues will have little meaning to them personally– tax policy is an example. The greater part of high school students are consumed with frivolity and I would not put much weight or trust in their theoretical vote.
0
0
-
183
Zallie
in November 10th, 2008 @ 22:01182 – I agree. Additionally, highschoolers may vote against their parents parties as a way of showing their independence, which is hardly a good idea.
What do Musers think about the US’s drinking age? It’s 21 currently.
0
0
-
184
Luna the Lovely (11.5 Potterpoints!)
in November 10th, 2008 @ 22:07183–I’m fine with the drinking age, although I can also see the validity in some arguments for it being lowered. For instance, European countries that allow earlier drinking don’t seem to have near as much problems with teenage alcohol abuse as the US. (Note: i have no hard facts for this……although, where I worked back home there was a Brit employed, and she had commented on more than one occasion that England didn’t ahve the same issues with teens and alcohol, and attributed it to the lower drinking age)
Also, I know for a fact that if kids (as in teens), want to drink, they will find a way, despite being underage. I swear I’m the only person on my floor (with the possible exception of my roomie) who hasn’t drank (at all, to be specific). I mean, I don’t know all the ins and outs, so maybe this is alllowed, but I think that people under 21 should be allowed to drink in the privacy of their own homes. As in, I don’t see that it is a big deal that if a parent thinks their child responsible, they allow them to drink (in moderation, preferably), in the safety of their own home. Like say a beer now and then, or wine on a holiday. Or whatever. I dunno.
0
0
-
185
Vendaval
in November 10th, 2008 @ 22:10I’d like to lower the drinking age and raise the driving age.
I used to agree with groundhog on the voting, but now I’m leaning toward Axa & Zallie. Nothing magical happens at the age of 18 though.
0
0
-
186
Rebecca Lasley (Administrator)
in November 10th, 2008 @ 22:14(182, 183) Not that adults ever vote for trivial reasons or because someone else votes the same way….
0
0
-
187
Zallie
in November 10th, 2008 @ 22:28184 – Specifically, I know Denmark has a large problem with alcoholism, and their drinking age is 16.
186 – Haha, totally true. But there’s nothing we can do about that one, really, aside from voter education.
0
0
-
188
Luna the Lovely (11.5 Potterpoints!)
in November 10th, 2008 @ 22:32187–oh, I believe you–as I said, no hard facts…..
0
0
-
189
Axa
in November 10th, 2008 @ 22:54Oh no, people definitely vote unreasonably (by this I mean they don’t review the issues at hand, are not thoughtful in their selection of a candidate, etc). I just don’t see the merit in adding an entire voter group that can most likely be counted on to be unreasonable as a whole. There is probably not a lot of difference in a person from the time they are 17 and the time they are 18 as Vendaval says. You can still be a moron and close your eyes and pick something. But there is still no legitimate reason to lower it.
185) I’m interested as to why you mention raising the driving age. Is that tied to the drinking age or a separate thought? I can see how it would potentially deal with the issue of drunk driving…or do you mean something else?
I personally see no benefit to the consumption of alcohol other than wine, but people like what they like and that’s not really my business. My initial inclination is, however, against a lowering of the drinking age, but as Luna pointed out if someone wants it they will invariably find a way to get it. Things like binge drinking, “peer pressure” type drinking situations and the like worry me immensely. I suppose it’s tied to my distrust of most teenagers’ common sense, as seen with the voter issue.
0
0
-
190
OB2012
in November 11th, 2008 @ 07:07Drinking age to 18.
0
0
-
191
Zallie
in November 11th, 2008 @ 14:17190 – Why?
0
0
-
192
Vendaval
in November 11th, 2008 @ 15:10I think lowering the drinking age would let parents introduce their children to alcohol, so it doesn’t come as an unrestricted rush once they’re away at college, or just off with their friends. Raising the driving age would cut down on the amount of drunk driving, other teen accidents, and in addition help to save the environment. Bikes should be used a lot more in suburban areas.
0
0
-
193
Zallie
in November 11th, 2008 @ 16:28192 (Vendaval) – Unfortunately, a lot of suburban areas aren’t built for biking. There are often no bike-lanes or sidewalks, and I’ve found drivers driver faster in the suburbs, because there is less congestion and fewer cars on the roads. It’s more dangerous, at least in the areas I’m familiar with. Some suburbs near me have bike paths in forest preserves, which is nice, but I would honestly be terrified to bike into a nearby suburb and I’m a fairly experienced biker.
Biking should be encouraged in suburban areas, which generally have a very driving oriented culture, (Some people I know from the suburbs have never taken public transit!) but there is a lot of work that needs to be done to make suburban communities bike-friendly.
0
0
-
194
Vetrlidi
in November 11th, 2008 @ 17:00I think they should lower the drinking age or not have an age limit at all, like other some European countries have. I think drinking only seems cool (not saying that is is) to some teens is because it’s forbidden and that it wouldn’t seem fun if it was a normal thing.
0
0
-
195
♫ Agrrrfishi {Aggie}♫
in November 11th, 2008 @ 17:04I agree with the current drinking age. If kids actually listened during health class, they should know what alcohol is and why it’s bad for them already so that they don’t need to be told what it is by their parents. Either way, it’s going to be an unrestricted rush whether parents like it or not, depending on the child’s chioce. lowering the driking age is going to expose them to it more, and them have more than they already do illegally because no they can buy it themselves.
The danger with alcohol is, when a person is only 18 they aren’t fully developed yet. They may look like it on the outside, but their brain is not fully grown and is still maturing inside their brain. Drinking can dull down the brain cells, making the person affected sluggish, slow, forgetful, and stupider than they were before they drank. However, at the age of 21, the human being is completely finished developing and the influence of alcohol can not affect them as much. Therefore, once they are old enough to handle the severe effects of drinking, they can. that’s what underage drinker need to know. I realize that lots of unerage teens still drink illegally, and we can’t do anything about it. Fine, don’t listen, get drunk, ruin your life. All lowering the drinking age will do is make it easier and quicker for underage teens to GET to them, and really, that doesn’t benefit anyone. However, I think that the straight, clean kids shouldn’t be punished and have the drinking age put up higher after they’ve gone through summer driving school and gotten all their hours, proving themselves ready to drive. Although driving can be deadly, drinking is worse. I think that both the drinking and driving ages are fine as they are, and believe me, I would know. I had to debate this in 7th grade on the cons of drinking, and I won by a long shot.
0
0
-
196
Mission: Improbable
in November 11th, 2008 @ 17:27Woah, how’d this get to drinking?
I think the drinking age is perfectly all right. They want to drink at an early age, then fine, it’s their choice to ruin their life and become an alcoholic at age 14.
0
0
-
197
Luna the Lovely (11.5 Potterpoints!)
in November 11th, 2008 @ 17:38195–well, personally, I don’t think there is any magic age when you go from still developing to being fully developed. Yes, at 21 you are certainly closer to that point (if not already there) than during your teen years, but I don’t think it can be said with 100% certainty that you are for sure fully developed at 21. With anything, there is no “magic age” where suddenly something is safe, or whatever.
As far as underage drinking, I think a lot of it has to do with the taboo factor. Drinking is something you’re not supposed to do, and therefore you want to do it. I’m sure you have been told by your parents or someone else not to do something, because it is unsafe, unhealthy, whatever–something that maybe, if you hadn’t been strictly forbidden, wouldn’t have done. But, since someone went and made it taboo, you want to do it. If I remember my history right, the frequency of drinking went up during the Prohibition, when everyone was banned from drinking, and people went to all sorts of criminal means to obtain/drink/sell it,. It was taboo, and thus everyone wanted to do it.
0
0
-
198
Vetrlidi
in November 11th, 2008 @ 17:4794- I would think gays and lesbians from what I see at school.
180-aww, that makes me feel so sad.
193-I agree we, a lot more public transit. I seem to be in the same boat. There are two close by forest biking trails, but trying to actually get somewhere would be dangerous.
195- I didn’t listen in 7th grade health, I was to busy doing my science homework. But since what we learn in health is what we learned in 6th grade, I didn’t have to.
I agree that there are legitimate health reasons to not drink at a young age. However, when countries without drinking age restrictions have fewer problems with alcoholism, it puts into question the value of having a drinking age.Huh. I also did well in a school debate. I was arguing for something I could tell was wrong, but since my opponent was mumbling and the audience wasn’t very caring and didn’t pay much attention, I won.
0
0
-
199
Vendaval
in November 11th, 2008 @ 18:15195 Aggie-
If kids actually listened during health class
There a certain percentage of kids who stubbornly won’t listen during health class, and there’s nothing you can do to change that. The culture needs to be addressed, and changing the laws would help do that.don’t need to be told what it is by their parents
It seems to me that discussions with parents are better than health classes, because they are one on one, and specifically tailored. We should be urging more family communication, not hoping that our school system will take care of it. (Is the school system really reliable everywhere? It’s the low-income at-risk places that might not have the funding for things like health classes.)lowering the driking age is going to expose them to it more
Lowering the drinking age is intended to get kids used to what alcohol is, and the effects it can have. Greater exposure in moderate amounts would cut down on the amount of extreme binging that is likely to occur later.them have more than they already do illegally because no they can buy it themselves.
I’m not really sure what you’re saying, but there can be a difference in the laws around the purchasing of alcohol, and the consumption of alcohol. In England for example, alcohol can be consumed in the home at young ages. Purchasing alcohol, however, is restricted to above 18.All lowering the drinking age will do is make it easier and quicker for underage teens to GET to them, and really, that doesn’t benefit anyone.
Addressing the problem of underage drinking and teaching moderation instead of abstinence could benefit us all.straight, clean kids shouldn’t be punished and have the drinking age put up higher after they’ve gone through summer driving school and gotten all their hours, proving themselves ready to drive
(It sounds like you’ve got some personal experience here.)
The drinking and driving ages are two different things. It wouldn’t be punishing the good drivers to raise drinking ages. That would be punishing the kids who will be responsible drinkers. Raising the driving age suddenly would anger many new drivers, but I think that they would be included in a grandfather clause, so it would only affect kids who haven’t begun to think about driving yet.believe me, I would know. I had to debate this in 7th grade on the cons of drinking, and I won by a long shot.
Don’t get ahead of yourself.196 (Kokonilly)- But not all kids who begin drinking at the age of 14 become alcoholics. In the US that might be true, but it’s only because if you’re involved with illegal activity at a young age, you aren’t likely to change. I would think you’d want to repeal the laws entirely, if you’re saying they don’t do anything.
0
0
-
200
Zallie
in November 11th, 2008 @ 20:56195 (Aggie) – “However, at the age of 21, the human being is completely finished developing and the influence of alcohol can not affect them as much.
21 is just an arbitrary a number as 18. People stop developing at different rates according to gender, genetics, hormonal activity, etc. Maybe more people are finished growing at 21 (although it would be mostly girls, most men are still growing in their mid-twenties), but if the drinking age was the age that “the human being is completely finished developing” It should be 25 or 26.“Therefore, once they are old enough to handle the severe effects of drinking, they can.”
Drinking doesn’t have to have severe effects. And, age has nothing to do with how responsible a person is with alcohol. Many adults are less responsible with alcohol than my underage friends are. It depends on the person’s self-control, their genetic susceptibility to intoxication etc.“Fine, don’t listen, get drunk, ruin your life.”
This is a ridiculous statement! Drinking in moderation (or even getting completely smashed a few times) is not going to ruin anyone’s life, as long as the person is in a safe environment.Although driving can be deadly, drinking is worse.
Well, I don’t know what you’re basing ‘worse’ off of, but anyway I think about it, you’re wrong. Driving leads to more deaths than drinking does. Driving is worse for the environment. Driving is more dangerous than drinking in moderation.“I think that the straight, clean kids shouldn’t be punished and have the drinking age put up higher after they’ve gone through summer driving school and gotten all their hours, proving themselves ready to drive.”
I really have no idea what you’re saying here!196 (Mission) – “I think the drinking age is perfectly all right. They want to drink at an early age, then fine, it’s their choice to ruin their life and become an alcoholic at age 14.”
What does this even mean?
0
0
-
201
Axa
in November 11th, 2008 @ 21:50I’m skeptical of all parents begin able to safely introduce alcohol to their children. wine, as I said, is beneficial in moderation but to me a sixteen year old popping open a cold one doesn’t sound like much of a good situation to me. The problem then leads into irresponsible parents…
I do agree that the whole business of age restrictions can be arbitrary. I believe I once had a discussion with penty about how the age of consent somewhere in Europe was 16…I actually looked into that and it seems to be all over the place depending on where it is. Even in the US it varies, which I didn’t know! I don’t think we want ot get into that, though :p
I understand what is being said about developing a sense of moderation rather than going to college and binging all the time, but I just feel people would abuse it. I don’t have much faith in other people, I guess.
0
0
-
202
Zallie
in November 11th, 2008 @ 22:18201 (Axa) – Yeah. I’m skeptical of parents being responsible as well, but I’m even more skeptical of sense in allowing kids to go to college without ever having drunk alcohol. They can end up in a lot of trouble. Alcohol is readily available on all college campuses, even ‘dry’ ones, so it can be very dangerous for a student who doesn’t know his or her own limits and tolerance for drinking.
Re: age of consent. Boy are those ever arbitrary. It’s 16 where I’m from, which prompted a lot of ‘now you can get laid!’ jokes whenever someone turned ‘of age.’ Basically, it’s treated as a huge joke. It doesn’t stop anyone from having sex, and is only useful in cases of rape of an underage person, which, I admit is very important.
“but I just feel people would abuse it.”
And they don’t abuse it now? So, so many highschoolers drink underage. The ones who don’t do so for moral reasons, and are generally quite sensible about it. I know you don’t drink. If the age were suddenly lowered, I highly doubt you’d go out partying every weekend. And the kids who already drink? Well, they already drink, so not much would change.
0
0
-
203
Zallie
in November 11th, 2008 @ 22:19That should be: …skeptical of the sense in allowing kids to go to college… Sorry, all.
0
0
-
204
Luna the Lovely (11.5 Potterpoints!)
in November 11th, 2008 @ 22:34201-202–ok…..So, Axa, your comment about age of consent prompted me to (out of curiosity) see what it was back home (16 in AK–“unless older partner is in an authoritative position”), but I think it is 18 where I’m going to school (would explain the note one of the girl’s scribbled on her white board on her door on her b-day–“18, yay, I’m legal now!”)
But when I was googling it, I made a sickening discovery–in 2003, there were still a total of 14 states that had laws saying that it was illegal for people of ANY age to engage in homosexual sex (yeah, I know, sounds repetitive). I mean, that is horrible! (Fortunately, the US government passed a law at the time getting rid of those laws), but it is bad enough that most states don’t allow gay couple to marry, but for so many to have been making it illegal for them to even sleep together? *shudder* We live in a horrible world.
0
0
-
205
Axa
in November 12th, 2008 @ 00:33202) trufax about current abuse of alcohol, both in college and high school. you do make a good point that the current system isn’t working. it would be interesting to see if teen drinking went down as a result of legalizing it…reverse psychology and all that. hmm. this is an interesting topic. I’m still on the fence with it, but everyone has made good points.
and lol yeah I don’t think I’ll ever drink at all…I suspect I would have an extremely low tolerance for alcohol and become very obnoxious very fast.204) 2003? that recently? wow that’s pretty ridiculous…it’s outlawed in many other countries but I didn’t think the US was that crazy so recently. jeez. who cares what people do with the private lives?
As for the actual age, I think it’s generally 18 (it is here), so I was surprised there are actually variants on the legal age even within the US. Like Zallie said it’s not going to stop anyone (as high school has taught us all) but it’s still seems like as a whole we’d agree on an age?
0
0
-
206
Robert Coontz (Administrator)
in November 12th, 2008 @ 05:29If you want another eye-opener from recent history, see what Wikipedia has to say about miscegenation laws.
0
0
-
207
OB2012
in November 12th, 2008 @ 07:09195-That happens usually around 35.
0
0
-
208
Luna the Lovely (11.5 Potterpoints!)
in November 12th, 2008 @ 08:16206–eep. 1967? That was during my parents’ lifetime! That’s sad…..It’s also sad that I had to look up “miscegenation” in the dictionary to know what you were talking about before skipping over to wikipedia…..
0
0
-
209
Cromwell(OB2012)
in November 12th, 2008 @ 11:37We need to stop there being so many different state laws by passing fed. laws. States really don’t mean anything anymore. N. Indiana should be part of Illinois, And people in my town don’t Identify with other Hoosiers. It just doesn’t make sense.
0
0
-
210
Cliff Eagle
in November 12th, 2008 @ 14:12204- So what? In some countries, two men aren’t even allowed to sleep in the same room as each other, even if theyre not homosexuals.
0
0
-
211
Luna the Lovely (11.5 Potterpoints!)
in November 12th, 2008 @ 14:24210–yes, but I had the misconception that the US wasn’t quite so repressive as recently as other countries. I mean, yes, most states don’t allow same-sex marriage, but not even allowing them to sleep together? Honestly, I knew our country was screwed up in the recent past (and still is, in many regards), but I hadn’t realized we were so screwed up quite so recently…….
0
0
-
212
Zallie
in November 12th, 2008 @ 16:18209 (Cromwell) – Well, if Northern Indiana was part of Illinois, the state of Indiana would have gone red in this past presidential election. I think states can mean quite a bit, but in the end they’re just arbitrary lines. However, changing the borders now would be even more arbitrary, so I guess they should stay the way they are.
re: miscegenation laws. Yeah, totally absurd as a concept to our modern day world. That’s almost laughable. But, I don’t have a hard time believing they were present in our society so recently. The sixties weren’t that long ago. My parents were growing up then. I wonder if they remember anything about this. Especially in the light of the recent election, we have come a long way as a nation in just a few decades.
210 (Cliff Eagle) – Homosexuality is incredibly repressed in other countries (namely, those in the Middle East), but that doesn’t mean those laws (or similar ones) should be present in America, a country that prides itself on diversity and tolerance.
0
0
-
213
KaiYves
in November 12th, 2008 @ 17:09210- Not even if they’re related? Wow, my brothers would be in jail for sure.
0
0
-
214
Vetrlidi
in November 12th, 2008 @ 17:22Alan Turing was famously arrested for being a homosexual, in spite of helping the British win ww2 by cracking the German enigma.
0
0
-
215
Axa
in November 12th, 2008 @ 19:05206) I’m very aware of the fact that I would have been illegal half a century ago. That’s part of the reason I am so appalled at gay marriage bans, as often the same claims that would be made against my family had it existed in/before the 60s are being made against gay couples.
Biracial/multiracial children were expected to be social problems, the mixing of races was an abomination and unnatural etc etc.
of course I don’t exactly have it hard living on the west coast in the twenty first where lots of asian and half asian people are and no one really cares anyway. but the fact that laws like this existed makes me very sad.people need to get over themselves and stop caring what other people do with their lives.
and now I’ll get off my soapbox.
0
0
-
216
KaiYves
in November 12th, 2008 @ 19:20214- I know. Poor guy.
0
0
-
217
Zallie
in November 12th, 2008 @ 19:24215 (Axa) – I find it especially amusing that in another two generations, almost everyone will be multiracial. I honestly believe that by the next century, race as we see it now will have disappeared completely in the US. Most people will have parents of different ethnicity or cultures, and no one will know how to check the ‘race’ box anymore. Hopefully, this will take care of a lot of racism as well, but I’m sure we’ll find another way of discriminating against people.
0
0
-
218
MissSwann of the Cygnus Isles (Probama)
in November 12th, 2008 @ 19:26The whole gay/straight marriage thing is so ridiculoud and ****** up right now I just can’t even believe it. GAPAs, if I may:
[I think it’s easy enough for people to search YouTube for Olbermann’s statement on gay marriage. –Admin.]
Very moving. If you won’t post it, at least could you guys watch it? (I love Keith Olbermann).
0
0
-
219
Luna the Lovely (11.5 Potterpoints!)
in November 12th, 2008 @ 19:40217–yup. we will. like this: “What?!?! You come from five different races/ethnicities/etc????? You’re a freak! I am so much better than you, I only come from two!!!!!!”
OR
“What?!?!?! You only come from two different races? wtf is wrong with you? Disgusting freak! I am so much better, I am Japanese, Korean, Chinese, African, martian, venusian, british, scottish, american, mexican, french, etc, etc, etc! I am so much better than you, you filthy scum!!!!!”
See? People will always find a way.
0
0
-
220
The Man For Aeiou
in November 12th, 2008 @ 19:41Pathetic.
Heres my platform:
At the Local, State, and National Level we believe:
That there should be no discrimination based on sex
That there should be no discrimination based on religion
That there should be no discrimination based on ability
That there should be no discrimination based on sexual orientation or gender status (Transgender)
That there should be a universal heath care system
That there should be a universal preschool system
That there should be a universal k-12 education standard
That there should be many different ways a public school can work
That a women has the right to choose what she does with her body
That The Minuim wage should be higherAt the social level we feel:
That the space program should get more funding
That the District of Columbia should have congressional representation
That Puerto Rico should become a state
That The Intellectual Property system need to be fixed
That the Bureau of Indian Affairs should be split off from the DOI
That there needs to be more national parks
That there needs to be more Smithsonian Museums
That the National Archives should be put online
That We need to switch to Meter
That we need to Invest in alternative energyWe also Believe (Less impotent):
That veterans need better rights
That Youth need the right to vote
That town and city wide curfew is unconstitutional
That Tibet should be a independent nation or other free state
That we need a cap and trade system
That we need universal broadband
That the library system needs improvement
Columbus Day must become Discovery Day
0
0
-
221
The Man For Aeiou
in November 12th, 2008 @ 19:56I forgot two:
That gitmo should be closed
That Immigration should become easier
0
0
-
222
KaiYves
in November 12th, 2008 @ 20:02220- I’d vote for you!
0
0
-
223
Brendan (whose name is changing his name but his mind is blank ay the moment due to the time.)
in November 12th, 2008 @ 20:23Yay! No more dog racing in my state!
0
0
-
224
The Man For Aeiou
in November 12th, 2008 @ 20:28222- It was the NASA thing that did it, wasn’t it?
0
0
-
225
Luna the Lovely (11.5 Potterpoints!)
in November 12th, 2008 @ 20:50218–wow. If I were gay (hell, even not being gay), I would nominate him as my spokesperson. That was so touching, so compassionate, so heartfelt, it gave me the chills and moved me to the verge of tears. All i can say is wow.
0
0
-
226
Tesseract
in November 12th, 2008 @ 21:05220 – You’ve got my vote as well, although I disagree about Discovery Day. There were people here long before Columbus &Co “discovered” America.
0
0
-
227
The Man For Aeiou
in November 12th, 2008 @ 21:31226- It can celebrate all discoveries, not just columbus and co.
0
0
-
228
The Man For Aeiou
in November 12th, 2008 @ 21:48I also do not support Real ID.
0
0
-
229
The Man For Aeiou
in November 12th, 2008 @ 22:00O.k… I feel sick. look at this map:
http: // en. wikipedia.org/ wiki/Image: Samesex_marriage_in_USA. svg
no spaces.
and then this one:
http: // en. wikipedia.org/wiki /Image: Same_sex_ marriage_map _Europe_ detailed. svg
no spaces.
0
0
-
230
groundhog22
in November 12th, 2008 @ 22:08228 – What’s that?
0
0
-
231
Zallie
in November 12th, 2008 @ 23:04219 (Luna) – Well, that was a little over-exuberant. People can always find ways to be nasty, but I hope that once we’ve reached the point of overwhelming multiculturalism, Americans will choose not to be nasty to other multicultural Americans and racism will cease to exist, at least in the capacity it does today. I refer to the US exclusively, because I think we will be the first nation to be truly multicultural, but I have similar hopes for the rest of the world!
220 (TMFA) – I’m on the fence.
0
0
-
232
Luna the Lovely (11.5 Potterpoints!)
in November 13th, 2008 @ 07:40Oh, hey, good news! Alaska absentee ballots and such are still being counted, and Begich has pulled slightly ahead of the corrupt Ted Stevens for the moment. Admittedly, a small lead (less than 1000), and there are still “a lot more votes to count next week.” According to my dad…..but still.
0
0
-
233
Cromwell(OB2012)
in November 13th, 2008 @ 11:15212-I was thinking of abolishing them, which I realize is incredibly controversial.
217-I myself am Hispanic and Caucasian, with distant Middle Eastern.
220-Economy?
(99) and nationalize the auto industry.
BTW, someone at school called me a socialist. I’m proud to be one! And if you look at party names you will see D, Democrat or drive, and R, Republican or reverse.
0
0
-
234
Zallie
in November 13th, 2008 @ 11:27233 – “incredibly controversial.”
Hardly. It is incredibly impractical, though.
0
0
-
235
KaiYves
in November 13th, 2008 @ 11:49224- That, the antidiscrimination and Discovery Day.
0
0
-
236
The Bookworm & Lurline (410 piepoints and three B-Day Points and 42 KAG Points! And 5 Wung Points!)
in November 13th, 2008 @ 14:12220 (TMFA)- That Tibet should be a independent nation or other free state
Actually, Tibet is technically an autonomous region of China. The problem is that the Chinese Government is not treating it as one. The whole “FRE TIBET” Movement i very westernized. When Tibet was its own nation, it was a feudal country where the government (under the Dalai Llama) could take away en’s child if en owed taxes to the government!
0
0
-
237
Cromwell(OB2012)
in November 13th, 2008 @ 14:45234-I don’t mean a debate, I mean people disagree with me strongly and say NO really loudly. It would be better in the long run.
0
0
-
238
Vendaval
in November 13th, 2008 @ 15:31236- But Tibet today would still be much better off as an independent state than an autonomous part of China. Because China is not treating it as one, it is not one. The child/tax thing was from feudal times, when Europe couldn’t do much better.
0
0
-
239
Cliff Eagle
in November 13th, 2008 @ 16:07Free Chechnya/ Kosovo/ South Ossetia and Abkhazia
0
0
-
240
Zallie
in November 13th, 2008 @ 16:26237 (Cromwell) – I repeat, it’s not a controversial viewpoint, merely a ridiculous and impractical one. I cannot think of a single benefit of abolishing state-hood.
0
0
-
241
The Man For Aeiou
in November 13th, 2008 @ 16:46236- You are contributing to the lies: (From Students for a free tibet)
“Old Tibet was a backwards, feudal society and the Dalai Lama was an evil slaveholder”Beijing (as well as sympathetic Western scholars such as Michael Parenti, Tom Grunfeld and Anna Louise Strong) asserts that “pre-liberation” Tibet was a medieval, oppressive society consisting of “landowners, serfs and slaves.” Tashi Rabgay, a Tibetan scholar at Harvard, points out that these three alleged social classes are arbitrary and revisionist classifications that have no basis in reality. There were indeed indentured farmers in old Tibet. There were also merchants, nomads, traders, non-indentured farmers, hunters, bandits, monks, nuns, musicians, aristocrats and artists. Tibetan society was a vast, multifaceted affair, as real societies tend to be. To try to reduce it to three base experiences (and non-representative experiences at that) is to engage in the worst kind of revisionism.
No country is perfect and many Tibetans (including the Dalai Lama) admit that old Tibet had its flaws and inequities (setting aside whether things are better under Chinese occupation). But taking every real or imagined shortcoming that happened in a country over a 600-year period and labeling it the “way it was” is hardly legitimate history. Any society seen through this blurry lens would come up short. And in many ways, such as the elimination of the death penalty, Tibet was perhaps ahead of its time. The young 14th Dalai Lama had begun to promote land reform laws and other improvements, but China’s take-over halted these advances. It is instructive to note that today the Tibetan government-in-exile is a democracy while China and Tibet are under communist dictatorship.
The crucial subtext of Beijing’s condemnation of Tibet’s “feudal” past is a classic colonialist argument that the target’s alleged backwardness serves as a justification for invasion and occupation. These are the politics of the colonist, in which the “native” is dehumanized, robbed of agency, and debased in order to make occupation more palatable or even necessary and “civilizing.” China has no more right to occupy a “backward” Tibet than Britain had to carry the “white man’s burden” in India or Hong Kong.
Plus, you can’t say under the dalai lama like it’s a one person. the current dalai lama is number 14.
Another reason Tibet should be free is that:
The Chinese government, after the 10th panchen lama died, and the 11th was named, took the panchen lama and named another one. the status of the true panchen lama, named by the dalai lama, is unknown. also unknown is, when the current dalai lama dies, will the Chinese government also take that one into custody and name one of there own. the current panchen lama is 19 (named by the dalai lama) or 18 (Chinese)
0
0
-
242
The Bookworm & Lurline (410 piepoints and three B-Day Points and 42 KAG Points! And 5 Wung Points!)
in November 13th, 2008 @ 18:16The current Dalai Llama doesn’t want a free Tibet! He wants the same thing as I do, greater autonomy that is recognized by China. He realizes that a free Tibet would not be helpful.
It is instructive to note that today the Tibetan government-in-exile is a democracy while China and Tibet are under communist dictatorship. Which is bad how?
0
0
-
243
The Bookworm & Lurline (410 piepoints and three B-Day Points and 42 KAG Points! And 5 Wung Points!)
in November 13th, 2008 @ 18:22Sorry for the double post, but I realized I had more to add.
Many of the Tibetan people don’t even want a free Tibet. In fact, the Free Tibet Movement does not truly consist of Tibetans. It consists mainly of those who do not currently live in Tibet, and Westerners. Those people are trying to hoist Freedom onto Tibet. What gives them rights to do such? They aren’t Tibetans. Indeed, in your example, I would say they are the Colonists. After all, they are the ones trying to change Tibet to how they want it!
0
0
-
244
Axa
in November 13th, 2008 @ 19:44232) ugh it is so stupid stevens is even allowed to run. he’s a convicted felon! I hope for alaska’s sake he doesn’t win somehow because that’s messed up.
there have been proposals to redraw the state lines, but I doubt it will happen any time soon, if ever.
0
0
-
245
Vendaval
in November 13th, 2008 @ 21:00242- The current Dalai Lama is so kind and nice towards everybody that it’s almost unreal. He wouldn’t dare suggest that Tibet should be autonomous because then the Chinese would talk with him even less, which is pretty much zero. He suggested a “middle way”, a compromise for autonomy, and officials said it would lead to a massacre of Han people who are being shipped in by train, destroying Tibet’s culture. There is a lot of racism against the Tibetans from the Hans, who are the majority of the population in China. Most Tibetans want independence, and although they love the Dalai Lama, the younger radicals are less afraid to, sadly, use violence. Beijing has accused the Dalai Lama of conspiring with democratic activists, muslim militants, and Falun Gong, another harmless group the government has also brutally suppressed.
What gives us the right to “hoist freedom onto Tibet”? I didn’t think freedom was something that could be hoisted, you make it sound like a lead weight. All people want freedom. But unlike you, not all people don’t have it.
I think that TMFA left the totalitarian-repressive-dictatorship part off of communist. Communism itself isn’t bad, but if you look up Marx’s definition, you’ll see it’s impossible, and nowhere close to what is happening in China today.
0
0
-
246
The Man For Aeiou
in November 14th, 2008 @ 17:25242- the center part of my post was from Students for a free tibet
243- ??? if the people who wanted a free tiber lived in tibet, they would be dead. most are exiles, living in india. Like the Goverment-in-exile.
242- heck, china’s not even near the level of the communist in the old U.S.S.A. it’s a nearly free market one party dictatorship pure and simple. like Iraq.
0
0
-
247
The Man For Aeiou
in November 14th, 2008 @ 17:26245, not 242 in the last one.
0
0
-
248
Cromwell(OB2012)
in November 16th, 2008 @ 12:14240-I can. The states are based on arbitrary boundaries. The electoral college gives the advantage to people in larger states. They do not serve their original purpose. Laws will be less confusing. Need more?
0
0
-
249
MissCullen (Temporary surname until Nov. 21) (Or MissSwann)
in November 16th, 2008 @ 19:45220- You have my vote.
0
0
-
250
KaiYves
in November 16th, 2008 @ 19:50If the Obamas are the Fantastic Four, which one of their kids is Franklin and which one is Val?
0
0
-
251
Zallie
in November 16th, 2008 @ 20:00248 (Cromwell) – Okay.
“The electoral college gives the advantage to people in larger states.”
If by that you mean “States which have more people are given more electoral votes” then, yes, you are correct. The geographical area of the states is not (to my knowledge) taken into consideration when assigning electoral vote counts. That’s why large states like Montana that have few people also have few electoral votes. We have both the electoral college and the popular vote for deciding a president, which is similar to the Great Compromise. States with more people are given an advantage in the electoral count, but the popular vote gives all states/people and equal voice. There have been very few elections (namely, 2000) where the electoral votes and popular votes did not line up, meaning that the electoral votes (which you claim favour people in “larger” states) are a good indicator of how the nation votes as a whole, not just how people in “larger” states vote.
“The states are based on arbitrary boundaries.”
I do not see how this is relevant. So are counties, precincts, wards, districts. You name a boundary, and it is probably arbitrary. If we get rid of state boundaries, that sets a precident, and could lead to the removal of county lines, precincts, etc.That would be a huge organizational nightmare. States are in charge of their own law force, education (to an extent), taxes, some social programs, etc. By eliminating state lines, more of a weight will be placed on our national government, which is already heavily burdened. The national government has to delegate some power, otherwise nothing will get done. What you propose means a complete reorganization of government which is impractical at this point in time and, frankly, unneeded.
State governments are also part of the balance of power. Our state representatives and senators ensure that our interests (as a state) are being represented. If you eliminate state lines, you would also have to get rid of Congress, placing a dangerous amount of power in the hands of the president.
Need more?
0
0
-
252
The Man For Aeiou
in November 16th, 2008 @ 21:21Plus, the flag would look weird.
0
0
-
253
Zallie
in November 16th, 2008 @ 21:38252 – So true.
0
0
-
254
Robert Coontz (Administrator)
in November 17th, 2008 @ 08:42(250) Maybe they’re the Incredibles.
0
0
-
255
Cromwell(OB2012)
in November 17th, 2008 @ 11:08251-Any boundary is arbitrary? Cities and rural neighborhoods are different.
Of course, they need to be eliminated step-by-step. All of those things will happen if they are eradicated quickly.
The first step is the Electoral College. It gives huge, disproportional advantage to voters in larger states. I read an article about it, but I can’t remember where exactly it was. People say smaller states have the advantage, but that’s completely wrong.
0
0
-
256
Vendaval
in November 17th, 2008 @ 15:27255- It will probably never happen, but there are maps at The Strange Map Blog (Awesome all ’round) #5: The 38 state Union, and the Common Census Map Project.
I feel the Electoral College should be done with completely, and we should go to direct democracy.
0
0
-
257
Zallie
in November 17th, 2008 @ 17:32255 (Cromwell) – Yes, all are arbitrary. How are cities and neighborhoods any less arbitrary than states?
Did you read the paragraph I posted above explaining why your use of “larger” was flawed? Did you read any of my post at all? Electoral college is based on population, not area. I would like to read this article you cite. Can you find it, perhaps?
256 (Vendaval) – I’m not fan of the electoral college either, actually. It’s kind of flawed and (especially in light of recent elections) can lead to disputed presidents. Maybe a direct democracy would be better. I don’t know. It would probably be good if the electoral counts could be adjusted when population increases in a state.
0
0
-
258
KaiYves
in November 17th, 2008 @ 19:39254- Nah, Mr. Incredible wasn’t that smart.
0
0
-
259
MissCullen (Temporary surname until Nov. 21)
in November 18th, 2008 @ 10:27254- Yes! Now they need to have a baby boy and they’ll be set.
0
0
-
260
Cromwell(OB2012)
in November 18th, 2008 @ 11:12257-Here is part of it (from memory)-
Take, for example, four stockholders voting by percentage only. If they have 26, 26, 26, and 22 votes, the last one can never change the vote. To find the power of a state, find how many instances in which it will change the outcome.
0
0
-
261
JFTISG
in November 18th, 2008 @ 11:22I still want to give McCain Phanto-Phobia (fear of ghosts).
Oh, and I think Obama is like a mirror universe version of Mr I’s freind, Frozone, minus the Ice powers. In fact, he might have fire powers. Then, he would be “Benzone” (Benzene + Ozone).
0
0
-
262
MissCullen (Temporary surname until Nov. 21) (Or MissSwann)
in November 18th, 2008 @ 13:11I just watched an episode of South Park. According to them, Obama and McCain are notorious diamond stealers, and getting Obama elected was all part of a plan to steal the Hope Diamond.
And to think I would be in math class right now! This is so much more valuable…
0
0
-
263
KaiYves
in November 18th, 2008 @ 18:34There WAS an old cartoon called Super President where the President was a superhero. (Gee, creative title)
0
0
-
264
Zallie
in November 18th, 2008 @ 20:45260 (Cromwell) – I’m not convinced. I actually have no idea what you’re talking about, to be perfectly honest. Stockholders?
I don’t think it matters if a single state can change the outcome of an election or not. What matters is who gets a majority of votes and I don’t think the example you gave is relevant to that.
0
0
-
265
Cromwell(OB2012)
in November 19th, 2008 @ 06:58264-Although I think that we should disband the Electoral College and blur the divisions between states…you’re right. Unless something major happens, they shouldn’t be disbanded completely.
0
0
-
266
MissCullen (Temporary surname until I lapse out of my twilight phase)
in November 23rd, 2008 @ 17:44There was a car we were driving behind today that had a McCain bumper sticker. Someone had written ‘Obama’ in the dust of the windows.
*random comment*
0
0
-
267
Catkopelli
in November 28th, 2008 @ 16:09You know what would be better than Obama? Koko!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
0
0
-
268
Insane MLDM
in December 23rd, 2008 @ 00:20267-gotcha, but why not have Urania as VP?
I’m McCain, basically because (a)Obama’s even worse, and (b) my family is Australian Liberal. It’s confusing, the different names for parties.
I LOVE watching election coverage, even on a Labor station last year when Krudd won. They put pictures of all the Libs who might possibly lose their seats through the “shredder”. My cat had more sense and just shredded the paper.
But back to the point, I can’t wait to be old eough to vote. I actually want to go into politcs one day. Start a third party and become prime minister.(Money, money, money, wouldn’t it be funny in a rich man’s world?) Sad, i know.
0
0
-
268.1
Enceladus
in September 21st, 2009 @ 13:57Wait, Obama’s the liberal one.
0
0
-
269
Fire faerie of the Middle Earth
in January 6th, 2009 @ 18:47personally i like Obama better mostly because i don’t think McCain was ready for it.
Palin, on the other hand…….as president?(shudder)
I think thats why people say that 2012 is the end of the world…… with Palin as president it would COMPLETELY possible.
And I agree with Catkopelli. I think Obama is great but ……….
KOKOPELLI 2016!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
0
0
-
270
KaiYeves
in January 6th, 2009 @ 19:30Yes, Kokopelli 2016! That way, he’ll be the one who gets the phone call from the moon! *Knock on wood*
0
0
-
271
Fire faerie of the Middle Earth
in January 7th, 2009 @ 10:35I think all the muses should have cabinet positions:
Urania: VP
Aeiou: Director of Computer Management
Bo: Informations Manager
Pwt: Director of Homeland Security
Chad: FBI gadget inventor
Feather: Director of Agriculture
Crraw: Communications Director
Mimi: US ambassadorAnd if Kokopelli doesn’t win the election (inconsievable) he could be the Director of Pie Flinging Machines.
0
0
-
272
KaiYves
in January 7th, 2009 @ 11:25271- Since Urania is VP, Chad should be Presidential Science Advisor.
0
0
-
273
Fire faerie of the Middle Earth
in January 7th, 2009 @ 16:37We’ll have to inform President Kokopelli of this change in cabinet positions
0
0
-
274
nolagirl7
in March 19th, 2009 @ 19:02271- Don’t worry, he’ll win. Everyone will be scared of what might happen if they don’t vote for him…
0
0
-
275
RoseQuartz
in July 15th, 2009 @ 19:54This is still open? Huh.
0
0
-
276
vanillabean3.141 (Minka)
in July 16th, 2009 @ 00:39What do people think of Palin’s resignation?
0
0
-
277
Elias Eiholzer-Silver
in July 16th, 2009 @ 04:03I think she’s nuts. Read Maureen Dowd’s column in the times from a week ago. Her speech was bizarre, and her behaviour was even worse. Good thing she didn’t get into office, the strain of being subjected to journalistic and political potshots for misconduct got to her after 10 months without even being in the White House. The right man won.
Btw, I’m kicking myself that I missed the opportunity to bash heads over politics with some of the republicans on here. Does anyone still think that McCain would have been the better president?
0
0
-
278
Piggy
in July 16th, 2009 @ 08:04Ugh, Palin. I’m glad she’s not VP. Well, not that Biden’s much better, though.
277- The NY Times or the London Times? I’m not happy that Obama won, but McCain wouldn’t have been a very good president either. None of the candidates would have been.
0
0
-
278.1
Elias Eiholzer-Silver
in July 16th, 2009 @ 14:28I was referring to the NY times. As an American, it’s probably the best newspaper you’ll be able to get.
Compared to McCain, Obama looks like Gandhi. The man went to Harvard, wrote for the top economics position in the country, and is more than qualified to be president. McCain was a bordering-senile war veteran with a grudge about losing an unjust war, anger issues and a 70% chance of dying before his first term ended.
As presidents go you might want to go by intelligence and education. After all, it’s the most powerful position on the planet. Would we want it to go to someone less than supremely qualified?
0
0
-
278.1.1
Enceladus
in September 21st, 2009 @ 13:55And, here’s a strange fact:
McCain wasn’t born in America. He was born at a foreign US army campsite.And, I think that McCain is intelligent. I just don’t agree with him.
I like the Boston Globe. Because that’s the only newspaper I get, and I find it much easier to read. Less dry.
0
0
-
279
Robert Coontz (Administrator)
in July 16th, 2009 @ 08:45What defines, determines, or constitutes a good President? And is it really possible to tell beforehand whether somebody will be one? Historians are still arguing about Presidents who served a hundred years ago.
0
0
-
280
Kiga
in July 16th, 2009 @ 11:17Get into politics and you’re bracing yourself for more than a bit of arguing.
0
0
-
281
ibcf
in September 21st, 2009 @ 09:44220- Tibet be an independent nation? Good luck with that. :p
*scared of China*
0
0
-
281.1
bookgirl_me
in September 21st, 2009 @ 12:38Eventually they’ll get free. You can only oppress people so long and some people hold grudges for a long time. The irish are free; for who long was ireland part of Great Britain?
227- I have to agree with FS here. So far, Obama’s been doing pretty well; much better than McCain could have. I (okay, duh, being half-half) think the relationship between Europe and America is very important. In the small modern world, they have to try and work together. If you weren’t american, could you believe in McCain and want to co-operate with him?
0
0
-
282
Princess_Magnolia
in April 17th, 2010 @ 12:11Pseudo told me to hit the random thread clicker until I found an alive thread and then post on it.
0
0
