September 30, 2004
A thought about the debates tonight
I am seriously looking forward to the Presidential debates tonight if, for no other reason, than because I am finally going to get to see the candidates square off against each other with no help from spin squads, partisan p.r. flacks, and web hit-men. No intermediaries to explain the positions. I am hoping for pure, unadulterated content straight from the horse's mouth. I want a hard hitting, no punches pulled debate. I do not want mealy mouthed equivocation or cheap shots. I want to know what each candidate's position is with no filter in place.
I am bound to be disappointed but a boy can dream, can't he?
Posted by: Random Penseur at
09:13 AM
| Comments (4)
| Add Comment
Post contains 120 words, total size 1 kb.
1
Hey RP, my Granny used to say dream big in case it comes true. You very well may be surprised. Or at least entertained.
Posted by: Wicked H at September 30, 2004 11:07 AM (iqFar)
2
I agree wholeheartedly, I may even watch part of it for the pure entertainment factor. I want to see if either side can stand on their own 2 feet without guys coming in slipping them cheat sheets. For GWB I can imagine something like this "Pakistan - Pak ih stan" "Iraq - ih rack".
I heard a good quote from Bill Clinton the other day on PBS, it went something like this: "Debates show people and yourself what you truly believe in. If you are just acting, and don't believe in what you say, you have to be a really good actor to keep in character for a whole debate" (I'm paraphrasing immensely because I can't find the quote and I didn't write it down at the time).
It should be a good show, I'll bring the popcorn.
Posted by: Oorgo at September 30, 2004 11:39 AM (lM0qs)
3
I don't know if I have much hopes for these particular debates; they are so very controlled. Bush got his way in several things, including apparently temp control Apparently Kerry is not extrememly heat tolerant and sweats when the temp rises over 79 F or something like that. Bush also asked that he not be put to close to Kerry as Kerry towers over him.
Nitpicking and silly stuff and from what I am hearing the debates are tightly controlled.
Posted by: Rachel Ann at September 30, 2004 01:39 PM (0Haxf)
4
R.P., because even grown boys can cry with discouragement and disappointment, I wanted to let you know that politicians have a talent for speaking in such an oblique way that no concrete interpretations can be extracted from the words.
I'll be watching the debate too. And I'm strongly considering setting my sound to MUTE as in this way, I might find out more about the real person under the political masks. (just kidding, of course).
Posted by: Roberta at September 30, 2004 02:57 PM (nqIQK)
Hide Comments
| Add Comment
September 22, 2004
Coerced to Vote
Can you be coerced to vote? Should voting be a requirement for an
English Lit. class? One professor
seems to think so over at Drew University in New Jersey. Appalled by the low voter turnout among college students, Prof. Skaggs has made it a course requirement that her students enter the voting booth. Of course, once they go in they don't have to vote and non-U.S. citizens are exempt from the requirement. This requirement has provoked, according to the article, a lot of controversy. Care to guess where I come out?
Not in favor. I believe it is contrary to our system of government to require a vote. It is clear that sometimes a decision not to vote is a protest and is as much an expression of free speech as a decision to vote. In other words, we have the option of abstaining if we don't like either candidate and we want to send a message that a candidate may win, but that candidate lacks the popular mandate necessary to bend Congress to his or her will. That can be a powerful and important message and you send it by staying home from the polls. I think that this professor, will coming from crunchy good motives, lacks an appreciation of this aspect of our system.
What do you think?
Posted by: Random Penseur at
08:00 AM
| Comments (6)
| Add Comment
Post contains 226 words, total size 1 kb.
1
I agree with you, in essence. However, I believe that the civil duty of a person wishing to abstain from voting would be better served by tendering a blank vote.
Posted by: Mick at September 22, 2004 09:35 AM (VhRca)
2
I tend to disagree, although it's hard to vote for someone you don't entirely stand behind, you have to vote for the lesser of the evils (depending on the country you live in that could be many). In Canada at the last election I think voter turnout was around 59%, mostly because no one liked any of the candidates. The apathy has been continually getting worse over the last few terms. If you don't vote, you are allowing your fellow citizens to speak for you, and are you guaranteed they will make the right choice?
Posted by: Oorgo at September 22, 2004 11:02 AM (lM0qs)
3
Sorry, I meant to say civic duty, of course.
Posted by: Mick at September 22, 2004 12:29 PM (VhRca)
4
Not in favor.
Reminds me of the Lit teacher I had in high school who, for extra credit on tests, would pose questions on Bible verses.
We went round and round on that one.
I won.
I also got an "A". Mwheh.
Posted by: Margi at September 23, 2004 12:11 AM (MAdsZ)
5
It's compulsary for everyone in Australia and that seems to work. It comes down to whether voting is a right or obligation. I prefer to think it's the latter.
Posted by: Simon at September 23, 2004 06:59 AM (GWTmv)
6
Personally I think anybody who doesn't vote is an ass, regardless of the reason. There is no "Presidential" vote. It's a vote for the President, Senators, Congressmen, Judges, Assemblymen, Directors of Agriculture, School Superintendants, etc, ad infinitum.
And yet, I support the right not to vote.
Sometimes it's hard living with the dichotomy of Jim.
Posted by: Jim at September 23, 2004 09:45 PM (GCA5m)
Hide Comments
| Add Comment
September 09, 2004
Jakarta Bombing
I want simply to refer everyone to Simon's site today,
Simon World to go check out the analysis and collection of links he has posted regarding the bombing of the Australian embassy in Jakarta. If, for some reason, you lack the time, let me post this photograph here because, at the end of the day, it tells you all you need to know:

Their flag looks quite proud, still.
My deepest condolences to the Australians and to the Indonesians.
Posted by: Random Penseur at
08:49 AM
| Comments (3)
| Add Comment
Post contains 83 words, total size 1 kb.
1
Devastating!!! Will it never end???
Posted by: Mick at September 09, 2004 01:11 PM (VhRca)
2
Thank you for posting this - and for so often being a source of information on the lives of those effected by terrorism.
Posted by: Elizabeth at September 09, 2004 08:27 PM (gwzoL)
3
Penseur,I just saw the same photo in Malaysia's version of the Daily Mail.
For some reason, it hit me harder when reading it on your site. Perhaps because of your human, rather than "factual", slant.
Posted by: emily at September 12, 2004 05:54 AM (lE/DR)
Hide Comments
| Add Comment
22kb generated in CPU 0.0094, elapsed 0.0409 seconds.
63 queries taking 0.0341 seconds, 145 records returned.
Powered by Minx 1.1.6c-pink.