Politics '11: Keeping up with the Xornses

[metroid composite]

Ladies and gentlemen, the new Mayor of Toronto:

http://www.citytv.com/toronto/citynews/news/local/article/17952--councillor-rob-ford-under-fire-over-aids-comments
http://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/national/toronto/rob-ford-and-a-decade-of-controversy/article1678543/page2/

[Dhyerwolf]

The exhorbitant cost to taxpayers is the main reason I'm for legalizing marijuana. Think of the CA budget crisis one year was over $20 billion? Because it's completely not-impossible that we spend 5%-10% that much as a state for jailing over marijuana.

[Luther Lansfeld]

Ladies and gentlemen, the new Mayor of Toronto:

http://www.citytv.com/toronto/citynews/news/local/article/17952--councillor-rob-ford-under-fire-over-aids-comments
http://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/national/toronto/rob-ford-and-a-decade-of-controversy/article1678543/page2/

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nySs1cEq5rs <--  Fuckin' cyclists.

[Shale]

SHOCKING NEWS: Christine O'Donnell got her ass kicked today. Democrats also picked up the House seat Mike Castle vacated to run for the Senate, so that was pretty much a clusterfuck all around.

[superaielman]

http://www.cnn.com/2010/TRAVEL/11/12/travel.screening/index.html?hpt=T1 As always, fuck the TSA.

[Taishyr]

Yeah, kinda decided my next trip (DLC/SF) would be via train at this point. If I felt the TSA was remotely trustworthy maybe I'd change my tune but at this point I can't really see a good enough reason to utilize flight. Alternately I figure out the hell that is Greyhound but not terribly inclined in that direction, you know?

[Grefter]

http://exiledonline.com/the-rally-to-restore-vanity-generation-x-celebrates-its-homeric-struggle-against-lameness/

So many many good lines in this.  People should take note.  Not that I think John Stewart or Colbert are bad things, but taking them seriously and letting them (making?) them figureheads for your movement is a bad idea.  Yes the Left in the US is directionless and stupid, you are letting it be so.  Get the fuck out there and start DOING something.

Going to do 2 quotes from near the end of the article that I love.

Ever read the preamble to the Constitution? There’s nothing about private property there and self-interest. Nothing at all about that. It’s a contract whose purpose is clearly spelled out, and it’s a purpose that’s the very opposite of the purpose driving Stewart’s rally, or the purpose driving the libertarian ideology so dominant over the past few generations. This country, by contract, was founded in order to strive for a “more Perfect Union”—that’s “union,” as in the pairing of the words “perfect” and “union”—not sovereign, not states, not local, not selfish, but “union.” And that other purpose at the end of the Constitution’s contractual obligations: promote the “General Welfare.” That means “welfare.” Not “everyone for himself” but “General Welfare.” That’s what it is to be American: to strive to form the most perfect union with each other, and to promote everyone’s general betterment. That’s it. The definition of an American patriot is anyone promoting the General Welfare of every single American, and anyone helping to form the most perfect Union—that’s “union”, repeat, “Union” you dumb fucks.

If this theoretical country that stood for that kind of shit existed today I would live there in a heartbeat (Canada maybe?)

Anytime anyone says anything libertarian, spit on them. Libertarians are by definition enemies of the state: they are against promoting American citizens’ general welfare and against policies that create a perfect union. Like Communists before them, they are actively subverting the Constitution and the American Dream, and replacing it with a Kleptocratic Nightmare.

*Salute*

[NotMiki]

Ok, I gotta say, Gref, the article annoys me, and so do your quotes.

Annoyance #1:

A century-old ideological movement, Liberalism: once devoted to impossible causes like ending racism and inequality, empowering the powerless, fighting against militarism, and all that silly hippie shit—now it’s been reduced to besting the other side at one-liners…

A century ago, Liberalism was not about ending racism and inequality, empowering the powerless, fighting against militarism, and all that silly hippie shit.  That's why there weren't hippies in 1910.  Sorry, but no matter how much you like liberals now, that's not who they always were.

Annoyance #2: if the author read PAST the preamble of the constitution, it may become clear to the author that the Constitution sets forth a vision of a federal government with LIMITED authority.  How is that?  Because the federal government only has power to the extent that the constitution gives it power, as opposed to the states, which reserve the rest of the power.  Sorry, but no matter how much you hate libertarians, that's how the Constitution works.

The federal government of the US has the ability to do most of the wonderful public welfare-benefitting things it can currently do because of a long history of federal usurpation of authority from the states via questionable supreme court decisions and flat-out power grabs.  I think it's a good thing things happened that way, but make no mistake: the Constitution was not meant to create a federal government with such broad power.

[Grefter]

All of which are fair criticisms.  They are quotable quotes, soundbites of vitriol and the substance is backloaded something chronic.  Far from Ames' best work.

The goals of the Constitution and the way in which they were set out to achieve said goals are not exactly joined at the hip.  Reforms have happened as you have laid out, liberalism and requirements for liberalism has changed.  None of that means that the core concepts that the whole point of the Union was it so enable the general empowerment and betterment of the people.  If that involves greater power to the government at the cost of specific individual freedoms then so be it.

As for Liberalism in general not being about hippy shit?  Well it might not have been on everyone's lips, but it seems to have come up with an aging Ben Franklin for example.  The general hippie alternative lifestyle stuff actually does genuinely date back that far with the beginning rise of the Bohemian life style and blending that with the Romanticism movement (your William Blake and whatnot) and a lot of it sprouts up around the edges of the Liberalist movement for a long time.  So you know there actually was hippies around in 1910 (back to the 1850s in the US if Wiki is to be believed on the article for Bohemianism) and the relationships between them and the womens' emancipation movements again has some fairly peripheral overlap (in that both movements largely root themselves in lower middle class where you have educated young people with money but without the drive or pressure to make more of it than they already had).

What does this have to do with fucking anything?  I don't know I kind of got distracted.  So not much, but mang hippies are ooooollllld.

Edit - Not the most well made point either, meanders all over the shop.

[NotMiki]

One of the things that set me off about that article is its reverence for the old and its perhaps unconscious bending of facts to fit its vision.  Liberals have always been awesome.  The Constitution promotes only the best goals.  Both those would be nice, but they're not true.  More to the point, it's not necessary that they BE true.  By twisting the facts, the author is revealing that he puts undue importance in them.  Why should it matter whether a bunch of people a long time ago had exactly the right ideas?  Isn't it enough to have the right idea even if it doesn't have a venerable tradition behind it?  Thoughts, thoughts.

[Grefter]

Also fair, going to blame that on the Gonzo journalism like I did in chat for the horrible structure and readability.  It is largely representing the point in exagerated terms and expanding on it greatly.

Does it make for a well written interesting article?  Not really.

Does it fit a message of "Lazy bastards should stop being little bitches and go out and be political creatures) pretty well?  Yeah it certainly works wonders.  The opposite side of the coin has certainly shown how well shallow motivational intellectual dishonesty gets people going.

[NotMiki]

The journalism version of trolling doesn't do it for me, sorry.

[Grefter]

Oh man you hating on Hunter S Thompson?  You wound me.

[NotMiki]

I think there's a difference between this and that.  Thomson is a good writer.

[Dhyerwolf]

And I find myself annoyed for complete other reasons! Yes, Tom Hanks' daughter is a moron. There are certainly some good points in there, but to base your thesis heavily on one random girl's letter and ascribe it to a whole generation is pretty damn illogical. Really, most people (especially in my age group) that I know feel jilted because after growing up under two false wars and a bunch of war crimes, we find ourself with a supermajority in Congress who seems to gave in at every damn little thing. We always hear about compromise when they have a supermajority, but never see the minority side actually budge! So much so that even the upcoming Lame Duck session when changes might have been enacted is now potentially looking to be pretty neutured. Of course, anyone who blames Obama for Congress' doing is stupid. Democrats lost the seat in Massachusetts in large part thanks to having an ineffective fool of a candidate. And yet, I guess we just though that when 60 of those fools banded together and ostensibly held the power, they might be able to get thing done.

I'd ask Grefter, when you say get out there and do something, do you have anything more specific in mind? The only thing the article suggests is large groups of people organizing and coming together...minus the one instance that it happened because that was apparentally just a giant generational attempt to look cool. Unfortunately, the two big times I've ever experienced legitimately large groups of people around me coming together failed pretty miserably.

I could rant about this general type stuff forever, but the internet is a such a clunky method to do it.

[Grefter]

Voting is a good start.  Send letters to your elected official for a start telling them off for compromising on the stuff that is shitting you off for a second.  Let other people know about things for a second, even if it is something as small as linking to horrible articles on the internets.  Discourse makes the world go round.  It might not be much and it might be preaching to the choir, but it is something.  It helps keep yourself and others fresh and up to date on things that are actually happening and has the benefit of you might actually run into people that disagree with you instead of just working yourself up into a mindless rage in a positive feedback loop.  Do something more than laugh at Colbert Report every second night of the week at least.

Attend a rally, again I don't personally think there is anything particularly wrong with having attended this rally.  Just don't let that be the entirety of your political statement.  If you have greater issues with consumer culture for example, grow some food yourself with whatever (few in some cases) means you have, maybe join a local farm collective if you can.  There is lots of ways you can be a political creature.

[Dhyerwolf]

Unfortunately, I engage in several of these practices and can't say that I generally feel too empowered politically as a whole! I suppose I could talk to my crazy bosses about their politics, but being crazy and money hungry doesn't really make it the best idea unless I want to start a screaming match. I guess there somewhat the problem of it I disagree too much with politics on someone at a core level, discourse is kind of difficult. Sometimes it works, and sometimes someone tells you that Nancy Pelosi is the grand high ringleader pulling the President's strings and you wonder how to extricate yourself from a meal!

None of this excuses the flimsiness of the articler's core argument of course.

[Grefter]

Why would you feel particularly empowered?  You aren't getting anywhere yet.  Do you need more to feel satisfied?  Then you need to do more, help support your local party of choice and if you don't have a local party of choice, find the closest party for the one that you do support, help them get started and heard there.

[NotMiki]

Jim Swilley, Georgia Megachurch Pastor, Comes Out To Congregation After Gay Teen Suicides

Well here's something refreshingly off-script.  I coulda sworn this would never happen without an accompanying sex scandal.

[metroid composite]

http://www.cnn.com/2010/TRAVEL/11/12/travel.screening/index.html?hpt=T1 As always, fuck the TSA.

Yay.

I always opt for the pat-down over the body scan.

Jim Swilley, Georgia Megachurch Pastor, Comes Out To Congregation After Gay Teen Suicides

Well here's something refreshingly off-script.  I coulda sworn this would never happen without an accompanying sex scandal.

Yay!




On the subject of John Stewart's rally, I'm not 100% sure what it's protesting, but I think it's protesting the ridiculous way politics is portrayed in the media--full of paranoia.  Which is a very good reason to protest, in my opinion.  The media, and oversimplifying into sound bytes, is arguably one of the biggest problems with the current political system.

[NotMiki]

http://tpmdc.talkingpointsmemo.com/2010/11/freshman-goper-hey-wheres-my-health-care.php?ref=fpa

hay guys where's my Obamacare?

[Grefter]

Two different links.

http://www.reuters.com/article/idUSTRE6AA5HR20101112

Class action lawsuits against US banks forclosing shit like a mother fucker not likely to happen.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-11460897

Police suggest entire population in the Elm Terrace area do as follows: Everyone in every house in every street open a front or rear door or look from the windows. The fugitive cannot escape if everyone in the next minute looks from his house. Ready!

[NotMiki]

http://www.talkingpointsmemo.com/news/2010/11/pope_condoms_okay_for_male_prostitutes.php?ref=fpb

Pope: ok, you can use condoms.  but only if you're gaaaaaaaaaay.

[NotMiki]

http://www.mcclatchydc.com/2010/12/06/104788/wikileaks-swiss-bank-freezes-julian.html

Swiss bank freezes Assange's assets because...he's not a Swiss resident.  If that doesn't fail the laugh test, I don't know what does.  I am shocked, shocked! to find that one of our clients is not residing in Switzerland!

I dunno, this kind of stuff really bothers me.  You can't abuse the law and treat someone different based on something else they did.  I don't care if that jaywalker was Hitler, if no one ever gets busted for jaywalking, there's no reason he should, either.

[NotMiki]

http://advocate.com/printArticle.aspx?id=156878
A thoughtful article on the gay rights movement going forward, calling for restraint in the face of more benign forms of intolerance.  Haven't had time to more than skim it, but the upshot:

"The other side, in short, is counting on us to hand them the victimhood weapon. Our task is to deny it to them."