Baby Killing Leaders
Todd Berman over on Planet GNOME (or here, if you are reading this there) recently blogged about his thoughts on the "War On Terror", and again replying to a readers comments, albeit in a slightly less calm manner. Good reads.
Given the amount of anti-Bush protests, demonstrations, people and events going on in America I don't understand how opinion polls still put Bush and Kerry at ~50/50. Something is seriously wrong over there guys, and it needs to be fixed. Sadly I think Kerry winning this election won't be enough, for two reasons: the hard-right nutters politicians will still be around and the Democrats are still pretty right-wing when compared to some other countries.
Yes, I'm a tree-hugging nut-eating hippy. The highlight of yesterday was reading the excellent The Wrap from The Guardian, in which they slated The Daily Mail (a tabloid with aspirations of intelligence, meaning serif type) for running horror stories about how "half your income goes on taxes", assuming you earn £50400 a year. I quote:
But what is so unfair about the vast majority of New Labour's tax rises is the people they punish. The hard-working, home-owning, pension-building middle classes are ruthlessly targeted again and again, while the feckless and welfare-dependent are allowed to benefit from the Government's commitment to 'social inclusion'.
Erm, yes. That was the point.
NP: Blue For You, Nina Simone
Posted by rjw at Thu Sep 9 12:18:34 2004:
The saddest thing about the 50-50 split is that it allows Bush to pull all kinds of Florida-style shenanigans all over the swing states, ( eg Diebold have promised to "deliver" Ohios electoral votes).
The Democrats are a bunch of wimps. They will give in to right wing demagogues on almost any issue.
Have you ever looked into the eyes of a Daily Mail reader on the train? They all look so scared and angry.
Posted by Ross at Thu Sep 9 12:21:22 2004:
Posted by Jeff Licquia at Thu Sep 9 17:21:10 2004:
The Democrats are a bunch of wimps. They will give in to right wing demagogues on almost any issue.
Have you ever looked into the eyes of a Daily Mail reader on the train? They all look so scared and angry.
It's interesting that, given a set of conflicting impressions from the news, only one of those impressions could possibly be wrong.
I'll check back later. If you're really interested in a contrary perspective (as opposed to calling people names), I'll give you a firsthand account that will likely tell you things you aren't seeing.
Otherwise, I might humbly suggest that you do a bit more research if you really want to understand what's going on over here.
Posted by b7j0c at Thu Sep 9 17:59:55 2004:
I'll check back later. If you're really interested in a contrary perspective (as opposed to calling people names), I'll give you a firsthand account that will likely tell you things you aren't seeing.
Otherwise, I might humbly suggest that you do a bit more research if you really want to understand what's going on over here.
Why are Bush and Kerry at 50/50?
Many reasons:
1. The Electoral College system weights many rural areas (trending towards Republicans) disproportionately high. Compare Electoral College weightings for Wyoming (least populous) and California (most populous) states.
2. Business still slightly favors Republicans, and their donations show.
3. While Bush is a terrible President, Kerry unfortunately is not a very compelling candidate.
4. The bottom line is that many US voters are hicks. I don't know how else to state it. The number of Americans who react positively to "Pro-God/Pro-Guns/Anti-Gays" as a general platform is still quite high.
5. Americans have been "scared straight" by the popular media into believing that Bush's unilateral "GloboCop" agenda is the only thing that will keep their children safe.
The bottom line is that Bush probably can't lose the election at this point - he will continue to use scare tactics right until the very end. I would be very surprised if he won less than 60% vote share.
Posted by Rob at Fri Sep 10 21:17:54 2004:
Many reasons:
1. The Electoral College system weights many rural areas (trending towards Republicans) disproportionately high. Compare Electoral College weightings for Wyoming (least populous) and California (most populous) states.
2. Business still slightly favors Republicans, and their donations show.
3. While Bush is a terrible President, Kerry unfortunately is not a very compelling candidate.
4. The bottom line is that many US voters are hicks. I don't know how else to state it. The number of Americans who react positively to "Pro-God/Pro-Guns/Anti-Gays" as a general platform is still quite high.
5. Americans have been "scared straight" by the popular media into believing that Bush's unilateral "GloboCop" agenda is the only thing that will keep their children safe.
The bottom line is that Bush probably can't lose the election at this point - he will continue to use scare tactics right until the very end. I would be very surprised if he won less than 60% vote share.
Bush is going to win and this country will be better off for it. Their is a lot of misinformation in the media and the democrats have always been so willing (and suprisingly good at) demagogueing republicans. Last election, there was a flash video on the DNC website of Bush pushing people in wheelchairs off of a cliff. Not to mention the most recent forged documents re: Bush's national guard service.
And less and less people are buying this drivel anymore. The people outside of this country aren't used to the tactics used by the democrats in this country and therefore do not understand the polls.
Sorry (Non-Americans)... you cannot vote in this election. Thankfully!
Posted by adam at Wed Sep 22 05:42:30 2004:
And less and less people are buying this drivel anymore. The people outside of this country aren't used to the tactics used by the democrats in this country and therefore do not understand the polls.
Sorry (Non-Americans)... you cannot vote in this election. Thankfully!
You are a nut-eating fag ... hippy or whatever. Killing Babies? How bout I squirt a thousand dead babies in your mouth? Eat my nuts you pussy democrat (albiet your not even really a democrat). I can't stand the fact that you people with popular technology blogs have to put in your "American 2 Cents". Write about what you know. The reason the ratings are as high as they are for Kerry is because of young people that don't know shit reading posts like yours and watching shit like MTV and the Communist News Network. The media is LIBERAL. If you doubt that then you are just a moron. Study to be an idiot (then maybe you will vote for Ralph). Then read a book other than "Programming PERL", possibly on politics, get a job, stop being a socialist and then you can vote for Bush.
-adam.
Posted by David Pashley at Wed Sep 22 11:57:49 2004:
-adam.
If you consider the American media to be liberal, I'd hate to see what you would make of European media.
Posted by Vicky at Wed Sep 22 18:48:09 2004:
All I wanted to say was that I was reading my paper today and the headline story was about a British man who is being held hostage in Iraq, a man whose two fellow hostages were beheaded yesterday, and who is likely to be beheaded himself. His family were begging Tony Blair to meet the demands of the hostage takers and pleading with the hostage takers to have mercy. It makes my stomach turn. He isn't the first and he probably won't be the last. Every day I hear stories about suicide bombs, and people being killed; soldiers, civilians, children. It's chaos. These terrorists are wrong and its absolutely terrible what they do. But they are people, just like everyone else, they must be desperate (or maybe some are just insane). But bombing the hell out of them is just reinforcing their ideas about the 'evil' west. It's not going to make them stop, its not going to make the situation better. Why can't they listen? I can't believe that Mr Bush was right to invade Iraq. Saddam Hussain may have been an evil dictator, who suppressed his people, but is the situation better now? I don't think so. I think there might have been better ways. Using guns and bombs to bully and get your way isn't a good way to go about things. Two wrongs don't make a right. It's also the principle of the matter: the fact that the world said no and America still did it. It feels like Mr Bush thinks he is exempt from the rules. Tony Blair too. Bush keeps prisoners without trial in Guantanamo Bay and humiliates them by covering their heads and making them wear chains. Its terrible. These people do not have a fair trial or any justice or dignity. The American soldiers torture Iraqi prisoners. They put up an American flag when they first liberated Iraq and had to be told to take it down. To me, you should treat people how you want to be treated. Something I don't think Mr Bush does. Also, Mr Bush comes across as all holier than thou for saving the people of Iraq, but there are plenty of other nasty dictators out there. Why Iraq? From watching my 'liberal' European news, and also some American news channels, I understand that Mr Bush is basing his re-election bid largely on 'security' and the 'war' on terror (a war that cannot be won with gun battles in my opinion). I don't think I'd vote for him on this basis. But then, its not up to me, is it. It does seem he doesn't seem to know what he's got himself into. Lots of Americans now seem to want to pull out of Iraq but its too late now. You have to finish what you started and you can't just leave them to their fate. People here don't respect Bush at all. At the end of the day, too many people have died and my thoughts are with all the hostages. Whooping and shouting at election campaigns for Mr Bush seems a bit in bad taste. That's just what I think.
