|
Post by jbhelfrich on Nov 4, 2008 7:57:15 GMT -8
Come on, Kirk, tell us how you really feel. Don't hold back.
|
|
|
Post by jbhelfrich on Nov 4, 2008 20:43:39 GMT -8
“A Republic, if you can keep it.” –Ben Franklin We have worked. We have sweated, we have yelled, we have cajoled, we have talked, we have walked miles and miles of neighborhoods. And now, we have won. This is not the end. These people we have put in office, these people who are the realization of all our hopes and dreams of the last eight years, or the last 80 years, are human. There are people who want to cut the heart out of the Democratic party, to subvert everything we have built. If you think the lobbyists won’t slide up to the members of the Democratic majority as closely as they did to the Republicans, you’re a fool. They are doing it RIGHT NOW, at victory parties across the country. They may not all be the same lobbyists, but they will have similar objectives–to break down our elected representatives and turn them to serving the special interests, not the country. Even inside the Democratic party, factions will arise and try to pull us apart. These people can sell us out. Some of them, including Obama, already have. www.boingboing.net/2008/07/15/new-obama-poster-ill.html They will do it again, and again, and again, unless we keep them honest. Unless we remind them that we sent them there, and we can replace them. I think it was Kos who first said that this was a two part task: more Democrats, and better Democrats. We’ve got the more part down pretty well at this point. We now start on the better part. But hand in hand with that is keeping the good ones good, and making sure that they do what we sent them there to do. That work starts today. It starts right now. This is not the end. This is the beginning. Get to work.
|
|
|
Post by K-Box on Nov 5, 2008 1:38:09 GMT -8
It still hasn't sunk in yet. I decided to experience the final stretch of the election sans Internet. I got my boss' permission to take off work from between noon on Tuesday through noon on Wednesday, and from 5-10 p.m. on Tuesday, I joined my parents and some family friends in getting drunk (them on wine, me on hard lemonade), filling up on hors d'oeuvres and watching the election returns on those friends' widescreen flatscreen HD TV, alternating between CNN and FOX News (we were joined by a self-described "token conservative," who both gave and received good-natured ribbing throughout the night, and was certainly a better sport than I would have been, if the tables had been turned). We all joked and laughed and engaged in overly animated conversations, conducted in a slightly-louder-than-conversational volume, but even after Obama cleared the magic Electoral College number by leaps and bounds, it still didn't quite sink in. Thank you, John McCain, for showing the kind of upstanding class in your concession speech that I wish we could have seen more of from you during the actual campaign. For what it's worth, I don't hate you; I'm just disappointed in you, but I wish you well, and I hope you can find some happiness (and maybe even some redemption) in your twilight years. Thank you, Barack Obama supporters, for showing more class than your counterparts on the other side of the aisle - whereas they booed when their candidate mentioned his opponent's name, you applauded when your candidate mentioned his opponent's name. And thank you, America, for proving my cynicism about politics and people wrong, even if it's only just this once. I was born in 1975. I grew up to watch Ronald Reagan get elected twice, and George H.W. Bush get elected once. I was 18 years old before I saw a Democratic president in my lifetime, and he only won by running as a Republican. To make matters worse, even after he'd presided over two terms of unparalleled peace and prosperity, his successor was denied the presidency in favor of the dumbest son of a bitch ever to walk upright on two legs, who got elected to a second term even after he had visibly fucked up this country in nearly every way conceivable. My entire goddamn life, from my earliest childhood memories forward, I have always believed that politics are inherently stupid and evil, and that the same can be said for 90 percent of the people who participate in them. I don't believe Obama is The One or the Messiah or any overblown bullshit like that, but I don't even need to, because this is the first time in my 33-year-long lifetime that I can recall having a president who seemed simply to be a decent human being. I have ALWAYS believed the absolute worst about my own country's government and electorate, and I have ALWAYS been proven RIGHT, and it's depressed me to the point of feeling - in certain past periods of my life - literally suicidal, because for as much of an argumentative asshole as I am by nature, this has always been one subject on which I have wanted nothing more than to be proven WRONG. When Obama started his campaign, I didn't think he had a hope in Hell of ever winning, for reasons too long and obvious to list here. Everything in my lifetime of cynicism-building experience pointed me toward that inescapable conclusion. I believed the absolute worst about his chances of becoming president, and I felt both confident and depressed that my seething misanthropy would once again be proven right. It wasn't until I came home, read the other reactions online, and started to type this that it started to hit me. It's the stupidest, most shamefully cliched thing in the world to say, but I'm crying. I'm actually crying, as I type this, because for once - just once, but for the first time, in my entire fucking life - I've been proven absolutely, positively, 100-percent wrong on this. My entire lifetime of beliefs, about politics and people, has just been proven wrong, and it feels better than anything else has in a long, long time. And now I'm laughing, even as I continue to cry, just because this feels so good. Is this what it actually feels like, to have hope? Jesus, I can't even remember the last time I felt like this. I'm like goddamn Scrooge at the end of A Christmas Carol. So, thank you, President Obama. The honeymoon will fade, and you'll make mistakes, but for now, as weird as it might sound out of context, thank you for taking away my most deeply-held beliefs, about what can and can't happen in this world. It'll be the last time any of you will hear me say this about anything, but I LOVE being wrong.
|
|
|
Post by michaelpaciocco on Nov 5, 2008 6:58:37 GMT -8
First, Congrats to you in America for not screwing up too badly.
However, there is a bit of a dark lining to this silver day; the Ballot initiatives.
As it currently stands:
Bans on Gay marriage will likely pass in Florida, Arizona, and maybe even California. Plus a ban on Gay Adoption in Arkansas.
Votes to end Affirmative Action will likely pass in Nebraska, and possibly Colorodo.
And the Abortion ones I can't even make heads or tails of right now.
So, yeah, the works going to begin, and real soon, because while it looks good for the Democrats, the low end of the ticket stuff is still a win for the Right.
|
|
|
Post by jarddavis on Nov 5, 2008 7:36:45 GMT -8
First, Congrats to you in America for not screwing up too badly. However, there is a bit of a dark lining to this silver day; the Ballot initiatives. As it currently stands: Bans on Gay marriage will likely pass in Florida, Arizona, and maybe even California. Plus a ban on Gay Adoption in Arkansas. Votes to end Affirmative Action will likely pass in Nebraska, and possibly Colorodo. And the Abortion ones I can't even make heads or tails of right now. So, yeah, the works going to begin, and real soon, because while it looks good for the Democrats, the low end of the ticket stuff is still a win for the Right. I'm an independant and I voted Democrat this year across the board. (Except for Diana DeGette (D) here in Colorado who I think is one of the worst legislators we've ever elected, and yet, still won.) That said: Affirmative Action has some problems and even some hard core Democrats will admit that, when you hire someone to fill a position who is far less qualified then other candidates simply because they fill a race or gender quota. Affirmative Action needs to be rethought. Ditto on the Gay marriage bans. I will never support a constitutional amendment that says certain people will not be allowed to marry the person they choose. That said, the gays are going to have to reapproach this one because... it's a violation of church and state. Yes, that's right, you heard me. Remember that marriage in and of itself is a religious ceremony as well as a civil ceremony. By trying to force their unions to be recognized as "marriages" they are causing a natural reaction from church goers to fight against it. I can basically sum it up this way. If you want to to keep religion out of government, than government also has to stay out of religion. You can;t legislate morality, and you can't force someone to recognize something they whole heartedly disagree with. Time to rethink the whol marriage thing as well. Take a clue from Mitch Hundred as an idea.
|
|
|
Post by michaelpaciocco on Nov 5, 2008 8:29:23 GMT -8
I know where you're going with this, Jard, and in a perfect world, yeah, I think governments should not recognize ANY marriages and call everything gay and straight a civil union in terms of how the government deals with things.
Pragmatism says that that just won't happen however. Could you imagine someone trying to use that on the campaign?
So yeah, I agree with you in principle, but I don't think it would work from the mechanics of politics.
|
|
|
Post by jarddavis on Nov 5, 2008 9:30:15 GMT -8
Oh I agree 100 %. We can talk about what's right and wrong, all we want but... reality intrudes.
But acceptance of gay marriage isn't goping to come from legeslation either for or against. It's going to come from people and how it influences their lives.
|
|
|
Post by jessebaker on Nov 5, 2008 10:00:32 GMT -8
The problem though with the right's obsession with banning gay marriage is that it's so utterly hypocritical that you can't even stomach the bs excuses they use to justify it.
There is NOTHING fucking sacred about marriage, in an age where no-fault divorces are rampant and gold-digging is considered both an honorable and accepted means to making a living. To say otherwise is to spew literal shit and shit liquid out one's mouth, as far as harping on the "sanctity" of marriage.
In a culture where Bob can dump Carol, his wife for 20+ years for a 17 year old barely legal twat "just because" under "reason for divorce" or where Kevin Federline can marry Brittany Spears and walk away a year or two later with more money than Jard or myself will ever see in their life lifetime times 20, there is no fucking way the church should be allowed to tell Ben and Mike that they can't marry/have to settle for a "civil union" over an actual wedding. To say otherwise is to say breeders can make a mockery out of the concept of marriage until the cows come home but gays who want to be marry and honor their vows/the concept of marriage can't.
|
|
|
Post by Anders on Nov 5, 2008 11:55:54 GMT -8
Congratulations from Sweden! Thanks for being sensible.
|
|
|
Post by Johann Chua on Nov 6, 2008 2:06:00 GMT -8
There is a God. He was played by Morgan Freeman. ^_-
Anyway, it's a start. I knew some of the Inquirer's columnists had...reservations about Obama's fitness to lead, but that grade-A MOROn Ramon Tulfo (who's obsessed with Moros, Filipino Muslims, in the only good one is a dead one sense) thinks he'll be soft on terrorists. Tulfo also thinks that the cops were totally justified in killing three suspects in a bank robbery that left everyone else dead. You know, because we can trust the cops in this country, especially when they're carrying huge sums of cash to a conference in Russia.
|
|
|
Post by jensaltmann on Nov 6, 2008 10:26:23 GMT -8
|
|
|
Post by Anders on Nov 6, 2008 11:04:37 GMT -8
Ahahahaha!
|
|
|
Post by jarddavis on Nov 7, 2008 14:17:11 GMT -8
The problem though with the right's obsession with banning gay marriage is that it's so utterly hypocritical that you can't even stomach the bs excuses they use to justify it. There is NOTHING fucking sacred about marriage, in an age where no-fault divorces are rampant and gold-digging is considered both an honorable and accepted means to making a living. To say otherwise is to spew literal shit and shit liquid out one's mouth, as far as harping on the "sanctity" of marriage. In a culture where Bob can dump Carol, his wife for 20+ years for a 17 year old barely legal twat "just because" under "reason for divorce" or where Kevin Federline can marry Brittany Spears and walk away a year or two later with more money than Jard or myself will ever see in their life lifetime times 20, there is no fucking way the church should be allowed to tell Ben and Mike that they can't marry/have to settle for a "civil union" over an actual wedding. To say otherwise is to say breeders can make a mockery out of the concept of marriage until the cows come home but gays who want to be marry and honor their vows/the concept of marriage can't. Until you realize that you live in a country that has a significantly large enough percentage of the population who feel that Marriage is a religious ceremony first, civil ceremony second regardless of the circumstances you cite, and that the concept of gay marriage is offensive to those beliefs. Moreso, if you are willing to allow the government to enforce their will upon the church regarding their faith and belief system, than you have no right to complain when the same faithful start advocating prayer in school. You cannot legislate morality, Jesse. It doesn't work.
|
|
|
Post by michaelpaciocco on Nov 7, 2008 14:39:26 GMT -8
That's kind of the point we're making too, Jard.
|
|
|
Post by jbhelfrich on Nov 7, 2008 20:28:37 GMT -8
I was working on a long post to argue with you Jard, but then I realized Rogers had said it all first: However, when the Supreme Court struck down the bans against interracial marriage in 1968 through Virginia vs. Loving, SEVENTY-TWO PERCENT of Americans were against interracial marriage. As a matter of fact, approval of interracial marriage in the US didn't cross the positive threshold until -- sweet God -- 1991 These fuckers are wrong, Jard. There are no two ways about it. If we try to win them over, we'll never get anywhere. Sometimes the only way to make progress is to drag them along kicking and screaming. We can't legislate them to a moral position, but that's no reason to base our rules off of a "moral" position that is fundamentally wrong. Screw em.
|
|