He won. The “West Wing” scenario played out exactly as–
Uh oh.
Has anyone checked on Joe Biden?
PAD
456 comments on “I’ll be darned”
It looks like Fox News has started to cut Palin off from the republican base. They reported amogn other things she needed to be informed Canada, the US, and Mexico formed NAFTA, and that Africa wasn’t a country: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ezh2SNwPcKc
The smell is becoming odious. Would someone please change Mike’s diaper?
Alan, have you stocked up on your “Obama bin Lyin'” t-shirts yet? You like to employ logic barked at that level of integrity, so you must be sold.
Sorry all, but Arnold doesn’t have a veto on propositions. They are a direct form of democracy, for good or bad, and automatically become state law. Your only hope is that the California Supreme court (who started this mess) will overturn the proposition by declaring it unconstitutional. But then, how do you declare a direct addition to the constitution unconstitutional?
Well, it seems that California law specifies that any initiative that would require “revision” of the state Constitution must be passed by the Legislature before going to the voters. That’s how the last two such initiatives were overthrown – they were attempts to revise the relevant section of the Constitution, as they sought to not only bar gay marriage, but also specifically remove sexual orientation as a “protected class” under the state’s equality laws.
There is some question as to whether Prop 8 oversteps its bounds by the same degree – a question which will ultimately have to be settled by the California Supreme Court, I would assume.
I still look forward to the day that the Supreme Court agrees to hear a suit over one or more of these discriminatory initiatives, and strikes them all down as being in clear violation of Article IV, Section 1…
Alan, don’t bother, just ignore the little rodent and it will starve to death…
Although after another poster in a different thread said talking to it might push it over the edge I had considered taking a two-week vacation to talk to it constantly to induce suicide…
(my apologies to rats, hamsters, etc. for lumping that thing into your category)
Alan, don’t bother, just ignore the little rodent and it will starve to death…
Although after another poster in a different thread said talking to it might push it over the edge I had considered taking a two-week vacation to talk to it constantly to induce suicide…
(my apologies to rats, hamsters, etc. for lumping that thing into your category)
Luigi Novi: What exactly does the word “mandate” even mean in this context?
It’s like “winning” the war in Iraq, even though nobody can define what “winning” is! 😉
Luigi Novi: What exactly does the word “mandate” even mean in this context?
It’s like “winning” the war in Iraq, even though nobody can define what “winning” is! 😉
Although after another poster in a different thread said talking to it might push it over the edge I had considered taking a two-week vacation to talk to it constantly to induce suicide…
It puts the lotion on its skin. It does this whenever it’s told.
“You are a fûçkìņg idiot if you actually believe that just bacause the “majority” says so, that makes it right….”
So… You’re saying that McCain should be POTUS then?
“Make Election Day a Holiday and require employers to give workers the day off or something…”
I’ve seen talk in some circles from people who want to move Election Day to the weekend. That would make some sense since the world that made the system we use now has faded into the twilight of history and a Saturday Election Day would disrupt work days, schools and other schedules far less than it does now.
Of course, the lines really would be killers then…
“You are a fûçkìņg idiot if you actually believe that just bacause the “majority” says so, that makes it right….”
So… You’re saying that McCain should be POTUS then?
“Make Election Day a Holiday and require employers to give workers the day off or something…”
I’ve seen talk in some circles from people who want to move Election Day to the weekend. That would make some sense since the world that made the system we use now has faded into the twilight of history and a Saturday Election Day would disrupt work days, schools and other schedules far less than it does now.
Of course, the lines really would be killers then…
“Saturday Election Day would disrupt work days, schools and other schedules far less than it does now.”
Ours are held on Saturdays (Federal, State and LG).
And for you people screaming right now, sorry, but the majority isn’t always wrong as you’d like to think in this case.
It doesn’t mean it’s right, either, as you seem to think.
In particular, I’m not sure individual rights, particularly those as basic as marriage, should be subject to majority votes. That’s why the BIll of Rights was instituted after all.
And I am quite aware that the vast majority of the West Coast, 90%+, was all for interning Japanese Americans in World War II. And I will scream, for the rest of my life, that doing THAT was a serious wrong that should never have happened.
Some comedic highlights from the day…
Rush Limbaugh: “John McCain’s campaign staff has spent more time attacking Sarah Palin than they spent combined on Wright, Ayers, Dohrn, Khalidi, Klonsky, Frank Marshall Davis, and Obama himself! The moderates and blue-bloods in the GOP are suicidal. They’re going to fight us harder than they fought Obama. Are we ready for this? Hëll, yes, we’re ready! Yes, we can!”
I only quote Limbaugh here since, despite his irrelevancy and stupidity, he’s not the only one talking like this. He does have the biggest radio ratings of anyone saying it though. I’ve been seeing and hearing this for two days now from a lot of places and it’s making me laugh hysterically. Unless this is simply an extremely bitter family spat that will go away in a short time; the Republicans and their various spokesman and pundits all seemed poised to start a small civil war within the party around the pro-Sarah Palin faction and the various other factions.
I’m actually finding the prospects of this possibility very fascinating. My disenchantment with the Republican started in a major way with Newt and really took a downturn with W. and his crew taking office. He issues I had with them pretty much all stemmed from the fact that the most ideologically stupid extremes of the party were the ones giving us our leadership options. Now the extreme fringe is blaming the moderates for their losses this year rather than realizing that it was the extreme fringe that killed them and the fight that’s being lined up in the Conservative Movement, if it comes to pass, seems to be the extreme @$$holes VS the more moderate right.
Now the other side isn’t without issues either. The Democrats have been floating leadership that’s sometimes too far to the left of the mainstream to be truly appealing without a boogyman like W. in office, but their failings are that they don’t seem to see that themselves.
That’s all the build up. Here’s the question. Could we finally be, hopefully be, on the cusp of seeing the birth of a viable third party? If the Republican Party and its most vocal supporters create a massive rift where the more moderate members are being attacked by the party leadership and by the party’s mouthpieces in the media; could they strike out on their own? Would they be more likely to strike out on their own if moderate Democrats, conservative Democrats, in the party express interest in joining them to create a new party? And, perhaps most importantly, is there anyone out there right now who has the charisma and political stroke to spearhead this?
It may only be a pipedream, but as someone who has long since tired of the both the Democratic and Republican parties, it’s surely something I’d love to see come out of this.
I know you’re smarter than that Jerry, so assume you’re being sarcastic. Unless you equate basic human rights and John McCain as the same thing…
I know you’re smarter than that Jerry, so assume you’re being sarcastic. Unless you equate basic human rights and John McCain as the same thing…
Married people have rights, but marriage literally isn’t a right. Rights aren’t licensed.
Bladestar: “I know you’re smarter than that Jerry, so assume you’re being sarcastic.”
Yes and no. I disagree with Prop 8, but I don’t see the need to broadbrush everyone who voted for it. Living in Virginia, I’m getting earfuls from all sides in the most foul and abusive terms about how the majority was wrong and that etc, etc, etc. Yeah, there were some idiots and some bigots that voted for the thing, but most of the people were neither of those any more than the majority of people who voted for Obama were socialists, idiots or voting for him based on their shared skin color with him.
They voted. I disagree with their choice and I think it should be challenged on the Constitutionality of it. But the bile and venom is getting thick enough this week without the left doing everything they can to add to it as well.
Bladestar: “I know you’re smarter than that Jerry, so assume you’re being sarcastic.”
Yes and no. I disagree with Prop 8, but I don’t see the need to broadbrush everyone who voted for it. Living in Virginia, I’m getting earfuls from all sides in the most foul and abusive terms about how the majority was wrong and that etc, etc, etc. Yeah, there were some idiots and some bigots that voted for the thing, but most of the people were neither of those any more than the majority of people who voted for Obama were socialists, idiots or voting for him based on their shared skin color with him.
They voted. I disagree with their choice and I think it should be challenged on the Constitutionality of it. But the bile and venom is getting thick enough this week without the left doing everything they can to add to it as well.
Jerry Pournelle says here that “Obama is saying they intend to confiscate 401(k) accounts” (I think someone’s been playing the Telephone Game again), and that good Conservatives like himself, Sarah Palin, Newt Gingrich, etc. need to build a New Republican Party, shutting out the New England (if any remain after this election) and “Country Club” Republicans such as the Bushes, in order to fight Obama and the “rapacious wolves” of the Democratic Party.
I suspect (and it’s just that, a suspicion, nothing more) that the “Obama will steal your 401(k) money” meme is a talking point which was held in reserve in the event that he won the election, so that there would be a fresh, unused rumor immediately available for sabotaging his administration from the start — even if he denies it, it’ll get spread anyway just as with the “secret Muslim” and “palling around with Bill Ayres” memes.
I can’t see how anyone can call 52% a clear majority.
Well, it’s enough of a majority that certain political parties can’t sneak an illegal victory out of it. One million or 10 million, it couldn’t be faked through recounts and court-appointed cronies.
If Obama only got 60 million votes, then only 20% of Americans voted for him.
Really? Then the election was rigged, because 300 million US citizens are not eligible to vote – you’d have to include all non-citizens and infants to get that number. About 1.1 million voters actually voted (McCain votes + Obama votes, not counting any bizarre abstainers or the phantom double or triple registrees), so statistics can only be compared to this number.
No one screamed or swore harder than I did following the 2000 and 2004 elections, but I did not fall into the utter hatred and nastiness I’ve seen and read about on some of the news sites that the McCain supporters are supposedly voicing. I’m appalled at even the idea that these people were – and still are – crying and wailing and praying and threatening over it. I had a patron, an elderly gentleman, informing me in exquisite detail why Tuesday was the darkest day this country had ever seen, and he wasn’t making a pun. What is so difficult about accepting that your team lost? Are these the same people that riot when they lose a sports event? (My instincts say yes, but I only follow Formula One and they don’t riot). The majority spoke. The electoral college spoke. Even Alaska didn’t vote for Palin by a big margin (as opposed to the 92% for Obama in DC). If anyone ever had a right to have a major case of sour grapes, it was Gore in 2000, but he didn’t. While McCain responded with grace and class, his groupies are rapidly losing my sympathy and gaining only my disgust. It’s done, it’s over, move on.
“The darkest day in our history”?
Darker than April 12, 1861?
Darker than October 29, 1929?
Darker than December 7, 1941?
Darker than September 11, 2001?
Huh???
“The darkest day in our history”?
Darker than April 12, 1861?
Darker than October 29, 1929?
Darker than December 7, 1941?
Darker than September 11, 2001?
Huh???
October 24, 1929 – stupid keyboard…
October 24, 1929 – stupid keyboard…
Alan Coil: If Obama only got 60 million votes, then only 20% of Americans voted for him
Luigi Novi: Only if you imagine that every U.S. citizen is of voting age, and ended up voting. Since this is not the case, one must use 146,763,383 as the 100%, since that’s how many voted, and given that, Obama got 52.5% of the vote, since 64,629,649 voted for him. (http://tinyurl.com/6okgs5)
Sam Wurzelbacher: “I asked what every Joe in America wanted to ask him and for that I was made an example by the media for asking that simple question, because no one in the media was asking him this,”
Luigi Novi: No. You were made an example of because your claims were found to be bogus, because it was found that you wouldn’t be affected by Obama’s tax plans, and because you were revealed to be an inarticulate retard who makes intellectually dubious statements, like agreeing that Obama is a threat to Israel, like claiming when this is questioned that other people should come up with reasons why you say things like this, and “more people know about me than Obama.”
Sam Wurzelbacher: “[the] media has been against [President] Bush throughout and before his first election in 2000, with the exception of 9/11, period.”
Luigi Novi: No, the media just reported that the country was, and with evidently valid reasons.
Susan O: “I had a patron, an elderly gentleman, informing me in exquisite detail why Tuesday was the darkest day this country had ever seen, and he wasn’t making a pun. What is so difficult about accepting that your team lost?”
It’s not just the “team” that they’re bitter over, Susan, it’s the myth of Obama that they’re afraid of. I have an aunt and uncle who still, no matter how many times it has been corrected, believe that they are seeing a radical Muslim with extremely strong ties to foreign and domestic terrorists being placed in the highest political office in our country. I know people young and old who will tell you right now that Obama has no documentation of proof that he was born of a legal American birth and is an American citizen. They’ll also be the first to tell you that it has been proven that he was born in Kenya. I can introduce you to people that will tell you with a completely straight face that Obama is the anti-Christ and that the Book of Revelation clearly spells it out even though most of what they cite is no where to be found in the thing. I can introduce you to many people on the right who, like their many counterparts on the Left, only get their information from a steady stream of “honest” media sources that in all reality are patrician liars that are spinning facts and feeding an audience the falsehoods that the audience desperately wants to be fed.
Too many people on both sides don’t want to take the time to learn the truth or to even hear the truth. Once they’ve made up their minds about what the “real truth” is there’s no easy way to pull them back from the brink this early in the game. Hëll, some of them may never come back from the brink.
Susan O: “I had a patron, an elderly gentleman, informing me in exquisite detail why Tuesday was the darkest day this country had ever seen, and he wasn’t making a pun. What is so difficult about accepting that your team lost?”
It’s not just the “team” that they’re bitter over, Susan, it’s the myth of Obama that they’re afraid of. I have an aunt and uncle who still, no matter how many times it has been corrected, believe that they are seeing a radical Muslim with extremely strong ties to foreign and domestic terrorists being placed in the highest political office in our country. I know people young and old who will tell you right now that Obama has no documentation of proof that he was born of a legal American birth and is an American citizen. They’ll also be the first to tell you that it has been proven that he was born in Kenya. I can introduce you to people that will tell you with a completely straight face that Obama is the anti-Christ and that the Book of Revelation clearly spells it out even though most of what they cite is no where to be found in the thing. I can introduce you to many people on the right who, like their many counterparts on the Left, only get their information from a steady stream of “honest” media sources that in all reality are patrician liars that are spinning facts and feeding an audience the falsehoods that the audience desperately wants to be fed.
Too many people on both sides don’t want to take the time to learn the truth or to even hear the truth. Once they’ve made up their minds about what the “real truth” is there’s no easy way to pull them back from the brink this early in the game. Hëll, some of them may never come back from the brink.
Alan Coil: “If Obama only got 60 million votes, then only 20% of Americans voted for him”
As of this moment with 98% of the votes reported.
Obama – 64,643,455 votes
McCain – 56,903,815 votes
Okay, let’s say that Obama only had 20% of America vote for him. McCain got even less than that. Besides, what’s the point here? Anyone who could vote but didn’t (A) doesn’t count and (B) can’t be used as a debating point here since, having not voted, no one can really say if they were for Obama or not or if they were at least likely to lean more towards Obama than they would McCain or not.
You, me and the kitchen sink are stuck with the facts that we’ve got and the facts that we have are the final vote and a few polls here and there. Those facts say that Obama won by 53% to 46% and by, at this time, just shy of 8 million votes.
Alan Coil: “If Obama only got 60 million votes, then only 20% of Americans voted for him”
As of this moment with 98% of the votes reported.
Obama – 64,643,455 votes
McCain – 56,903,815 votes
Okay, let’s say that Obama only had 20% of America vote for him. McCain got even less than that. Besides, what’s the point here? Anyone who could vote but didn’t (A) doesn’t count and (B) can’t be used as a debating point here since, having not voted, no one can really say if they were for Obama or not or if they were at least likely to lean more towards Obama than they would McCain or not.
You, me and the kitchen sink are stuck with the facts that we’ve got and the facts that we have are the final vote and a few polls here and there. Those facts say that Obama won by 53% to 46% and by, at this time, just shy of 8 million votes.
God this is funny. Hannity is going insane. He’s on Fox now having a conniption fit over Rahm Emanuel getting a big spot in Obama’s staff. What’s his big talking point? Rahm once told Republicans to go ‘F themselves” and that’s just so beneath the pail. That’s Obama “The Radical” showing his head and a sign that there is no bipartisan spirit here.
This brain dead hack is the same two faced political talker who was ecstatic that Cheney told Congressional Democrats on the Senate floor itself to “F themselves” and claimed that this was a great thing that showed the backbone and fighting spirit of the VP.
Yet another time that I’m disappointed that Colmes doesn’t show the side of himself on TV that he displays on his radio program.
So, surprisingly, for all the talk about new voters and excitement, the actual turnout was only slightly higher than last time. It looks like 60% plus or minus a few is the best we will get.
(Which also means that nobody will ever get enough to satisfy those who play with the numbers in the way Jerry mentions. If a candidate got 75% of the vote–impressive under any circumstances–if only 60% of those eligible voted people will still be able to say that 65% of eligible voters did not vote for the winner.
They can say it. It’s even true. But it tells you more about the teller than it does about anything else.
No one screamed or swore harder than I did following the 2000 and 2004 elections, but I did not fall into the utter hatred and nastiness I’ve seen and read about on some of the news sites that the McCain supporters are supposedly voicing. I’m appalled at even the idea that these people were – and still are – crying and wailing and praying and threatening over it.
I haven’t seen much of that at all but maybe the conservative sites I look at aren’t as nuts as the one’s you’ve seen. certainly I haven’t seen any of them threaten to move to another country or blame the loss on Diebold machines (Ðámņ, how did the Nexis of Evil Neocons not play that trump card???) or voice fears of a coming civil war…and mind you, all that came up from liberals I actually respect only 4 years ago. But certainly it’s true that any conservatives who did not learn from how foolish their opponents looked back then deserve all the derision one cares to heap on them. More, since they really ought to know better.
Rahm Emanuel is a smart pick. The classic “bad cop”. He also should calm the nerves od anyone afraid that Obama is not sufficiently pro-Israel. Emanuel volunteered for the Israel Defense Forces during the first Gulf War.
He’s also said to have been an inspiration for one of the characters in The West Wing. I don’t know if that’s true but I do know that his brother inspired a character in Entourage.
He won’t be popular with everyone, including a lot of Democrats but that’s part of the job.
Rahm Emanuel is a smart pick. The classic “bad cop”. He also should calm the nerves od anyone afraid that Obama is not sufficiently pro-Israel. Emanuel volunteered for the Israel Defense Forces during the first Gulf War.
He’s also said to have been an inspiration for one of the characters in The West Wing. I don’t know if that’s true but I do know that his brother inspired a character in Entourage.
He won’t be popular with everyone, including a lot of Democrats but that’s part of the job.
That boils down to a question that does not have a definite answer – who’s opinion is more important, the courts, or the voters?
No, it doesn’t. It boils down to the tendency of the majority to be poor protectors of the rights of the minorities.
PAD
That boils down to a question that does not have a definite answer – who’s opinion is more important, the courts, or the voters?
No, it doesn’t. It boils down to the tendency of the majority to be poor protectors of the rights of the minorities.
PAD
Rahm Emanuel is a smart pick.
Who, as Jerry also pointed out, is already being painted as a left-wing nutjob and that Obama is going back on his promise of bipartisanship.
Never mind that we don’t know what the rest of the makeup of Obama’s cabinet will be.
Hëll, even that ‘dámņëd liberal media’, the AP, had an article earlier today that put forth the same argument.
Rahm Emanuel is a smart pick.
Who, as Jerry also pointed out, is already being painted as a left-wing nutjob and that Obama is going back on his promise of bipartisanship.
Never mind that we don’t know what the rest of the makeup of Obama’s cabinet will be.
Hëll, even that ‘dámņëd liberal media’, the AP, had an article earlier today that put forth the same argument.
Started to watch the post-election coverage, then had to stop almost immediately. They were showing an almost empty Republican headquarters with one representative saying how Democratic control in all three branches of tghe government is “bad” for this country because it “destroys the very idea of checks and balances”.
Huh? What? This from people who were so concerned over losing THEIR control over all three branches not 4 years ago?
Don’t know why I should be surprised over people who made such a big issue over whether Bill “inhaled” or not in his youth, but glossed over W’s alcohol and coke use with “We believe the president’s past character shouldn’t be called into question as it has no bearing on the current situation.”
”Hëll, even that ‘dámņëd liberal media’, the AP, had an article earlier today that put forth the same argument.”
Stuff that argument. The funniest one I’ve heard so far from some Rightwing talkers is that Obama picking Rahm is a bad thing because it’s going to upset the Muslim world or make them very nervous/aggressive about us. You’ve gotta laugh when this is coming from the same guys who painted a picture of Obama as a closet Muslim and/or someone with possible ties to Muslim extremists up to a week before the election.
I voted for McCain, and yes I am disappointed that he didn’t win, but I don’t see it as the end of the world like some people do.
I can just tip my hat and say congratulations President Obama.
I don’t think one has to be terribly right wing to see Rahm as a partisan hatchet man. When Paul Begala describes you as a “cross between a hemorrhoid and a toothache.” you know it isn’t just Hannity that thinks he’s ruffled a few feathers. But as I said, that’s what Obama needs, a hatchet man to play bad cop. It probably won’t be republicans who feel his toughest bites. In the end he may even have to be tossed aside–it’s part of the job. These things often end badly. In return he gets to be a powerful part of the team, more influential than a mere representative could ever hope to be.
The funniest one I’ve heard so far from some Rightwing talkers is that Obama picking Rahm is a bad thing because it’s going to upset the Muslim world or make them very nervous/aggressive about us.
Making certain elements in the “Muslim world” nervous about us won’t cost me much sleep. Speaking of which, adieu for now. Gonna be an interesting 4 years…but aren’t they always?
I don’t think one has to be terribly right wing to see Rahm as a partisan hatchet man. When Paul Begala describes you as a “cross between a hemorrhoid and a toothache.” you know it isn’t just Hannity that thinks he’s ruffled a few feathers. But as I said, that’s what Obama needs, a hatchet man to play bad cop. It probably won’t be republicans who feel his toughest bites. In the end he may even have to be tossed aside–it’s part of the job. These things often end badly. In return he gets to be a powerful part of the team, more influential than a mere representative could ever hope to be.
The funniest one I’ve heard so far from some Rightwing talkers is that Obama picking Rahm is a bad thing because it’s going to upset the Muslim world or make them very nervous/aggressive about us.
Making certain elements in the “Muslim world” nervous about us won’t cost me much sleep. Speaking of which, adieu for now. Gonna be an interesting 4 years…but aren’t they always?
AJ claimed: 1) How soon before the second asassination attempt? (Especially since the Bush DOJ doesn’t seem interested in prosecuting the first one.)
Hey AJ, where do you get your news from? It can’t be very credible since these idiot white supremacists have been in jail and are facing charges of plotting to kill a presidental candidate (among other charges). Sorry to burst your Bush hating bubble. And here’s a link:
Wow, general Zod’s concession speech was a lot less classy than McCain’s: http://zod2008.com/
“You shall pay for your insolence! You! And one day, your heirs!” Defeated presidential candidate unleashes wrath at a traitorous America
It boils down to the tendency of the majority to be poor protectors of the rights of the minorities.
Doesn’t that beg the question, though, of who gets to decide what rights the minorities (or anyone else for that matter) actually do or should have? We have a constitution and minority protection because, at some point, the majority decided that would be a good idea and wrote it into the law. (Although the Republicans had to be kind of sneaky to get the 14th Amendment enacted.)
Trust the American people. We have a staggeringly good record of doing the right thing. It just takes us a while sometimes. (Like those 40 consecutive years the Democrats held the House. Hopefully it’ll go a bit quicker this time.) That may be of limited comfort to the people who suffer through the “a while,” but that doesn’t justify throwing out the democracy with the bath water.
Saturday Election Day would disrupt work days, schools and other schedules far less than it does now.
The problem with weekend voting is that both Saturday and Sunday are considered the Sabbath by large numbers of voters. Some Jewish groups wouldn’t be able to vote on Saturday. I remember that when I was in college, the security system for the dorms had to make special provisions on Saturdays, because some of the students couldn’t swipe their ID cards through the reader. I think voting machines would be at least as big a problem, as might traveling to the polling place.
I don’t see much of a need to promote voting more than we do. Most jurisdictions are moving to “no-excuse” absentee voting, which is a good thing. But it really leaves “no excuse.” As in, you have no excuse not to vote. If you can’t be motivated to vote at some point during the month leading up to an election, maybe your voice doesn’t need to be heard. Just a thought.
Rich: We vote for a reason. Majority wins.
Luigi Novi: Unless the majority wishes something that violates the Constitution. Then it loses.
But the majority determines the Constitution to begin with. Not just with regard to amendments like Proposition 8, but with ratification of the thing when it was first drafted. The Continental Congress referred the proposed Constitution to the States to be voted on. Federal Constitutional amendments are voted on in Congress, then referred to the States, where a supermajority of the States have to vote to ratify them before they come into effect. (Unless the amendment comes through constitutional conventions, which is even more populist/majoritarian than the usual model.) It’s not as though Zeus sent the Constitution down on a thunderbolt. It’s fundamental legislation, but it’s still legislation.
As it usually has.
Huh?
On behalf of the world, or at least my corner of it, I want to thank the United States of America for getting it right.
Some 48 % of us aren’t completely sold on the idea that we got it right. Personally I was close to tears at the thought that my country was now in the hands of Nancy Pelosi and Harry Reid, with no opponent in the White House to keep them in check, but maybe I didn’t “get it right.” We’ll see. In any event, your concern for our domestic politics is touching. I’m off to write an editorial for David Cameron, myself.
I hope Obama survives the first term. Hëll, the first year. Double-hëll, the first MONTH! Those gun laws of yours need to be replaced…
1) I’m pretty sure the Secret Service is making some effort to secure the President-elect’s life expectancy. Call it a hunch.
2) If you don’t live here, why do you care what our gun laws are?
I still look forward to the day that the Supreme Court agrees to hear a suit over one or more of these discriminatory initiatives, and strikes them all down as being in clear violation of Article IV, Section 1…
The Comity Clause? I think DOMA violates it, but there’s only a comity question if either (a) DOMA is struck down– a distinct possibility– and (b) there exists a pool of States that legalize gay marriage. That pool’s largest swimmer just left. If the comity issue consists of Massachusetts and Connecticut residents relocating, then it’s more likely that the court would order an exception to the law than strike it down. Most States don’t recognize common law marriages. However, if you live in a State that does, and one forms, your marriage is still valid if you move to a State that otherwise doesn’t. The Comity Clause doesn’t strike down your new State’s marriage law; it just requires an exception to be made. For a law to be struck down entirely, it has to be invalid on its face– the need to recognize an exception when there is a conflict with another law in some circumstances generally doesn’t do it, and even if one portion of a law is found unconstitutional (as by conflict with the Comity Clause) the balance is left undisturbed. A court would probably not strike down the new California Constitutional definition of marriage even if it decided that California had to recognize sister state marriages. Jerry Brown is right (not something I say every day) that the existing marriages will likely remain in effect; again, comparing it to common law marriage, the States that have abolished it still recognize ones that came into effect before it was abolished in their states.
The only way that Proposition 8 is whacked on Federal grounds is if the Court rules that Romer kills the existing precedent denying a Federal right to same sex marriage. Given that O’Connor (who disavowed that interpretation of Romer in her Lawrence concurrence anyway) has been replaced by Alito, and Kennedy (who wrote both Romer and Lawrence) semi-denied that application in his majority opinion, I don’t think that’s super-likely. I think it’s far more likely that anti-gay-marriage groups will be lobbying a pair of New England States to change and make the whole comity issue go away entirely. (Frankly I don’t think they’ll succeed either, but who wants to put money on them not trying? Anyone?)
It boils down to the tendency of the majority to be poor protectors of the rights of the minorities.
Doesn’t that beg the question, though, of who gets to decide what rights the minorities (or anyone else for that matter) actually do or should have? We have a constitution and minority protection because, at some point, the majority decided that would be a good idea and wrote it into the law. (Although the Republicans had to be kind of sneaky to get the 14th Amendment enacted.)
Trust the American people. We have a staggeringly good record of doing the right thing. It just takes us a while sometimes. (Like those 40 consecutive years the Democrats held the House. Hopefully it’ll go a bit quicker this time.) That may be of limited comfort to the people who suffer through the “a while,” but that doesn’t justify throwing out the democracy with the bath water.
Saturday Election Day would disrupt work days, schools and other schedules far less than it does now.
The problem with weekend voting is that both Saturday and Sunday are considered the Sabbath by large numbers of voters. Some Jewish groups wouldn’t be able to vote on Saturday. I remember that when I was in college, the security system for the dorms had to make special provisions on Saturdays, because some of the students couldn’t swipe their ID cards through the reader. I think voting machines would be at least as big a problem, as might traveling to the polling place.
I don’t see much of a need to promote voting more than we do. Most jurisdictions are moving to “no-excuse” absentee voting, which is a good thing. But it really leaves “no excuse.” As in, you have no excuse not to vote. If you can’t be motivated to vote at some point during the month leading up to an election, maybe your voice doesn’t need to be heard. Just a thought.
Rich: We vote for a reason. Majority wins.
Luigi Novi: Unless the majority wishes something that violates the Constitution. Then it loses.
But the majority determines the Constitution to begin with. Not just with regard to amendments like Proposition 8, but with ratification of the thing when it was first drafted. The Continental Congress referred the proposed Constitution to the States to be voted on. Federal Constitutional amendments are voted on in Congress, then referred to the States, where a supermajority of the States have to vote to ratify them before they come into effect. (Unless the amendment comes through constitutional conventions, which is even more populist/majoritarian than the usual model.) It’s not as though Zeus sent the Constitution down on a thunderbolt. It’s fundamental legislation, but it’s still legislation.
As it usually has.
Huh?
On behalf of the world, or at least my corner of it, I want to thank the United States of America for getting it right.
Some 48 % of us aren’t completely sold on the idea that we got it right. Personally I was close to tears at the thought that my country was now in the hands of Nancy Pelosi and Harry Reid, with no opponent in the White House to keep them in check, but maybe I didn’t “get it right.” We’ll see. In any event, your concern for our domestic politics is touching. I’m off to write an editorial for David Cameron, myself.
I hope Obama survives the first term. Hëll, the first year. Double-hëll, the first MONTH! Those gun laws of yours need to be replaced…
1) I’m pretty sure the Secret Service is making some effort to secure the President-elect’s life expectancy. Call it a hunch.
2) If you don’t live here, why do you care what our gun laws are?
I still look forward to the day that the Supreme Court agrees to hear a suit over one or more of these discriminatory initiatives, and strikes them all down as being in clear violation of Article IV, Section 1…
The Comity Clause? I think DOMA violates it, but there’s only a comity question if either (a) DOMA is struck down– a distinct possibility– and (b) there exists a pool of States that legalize gay marriage. That pool’s largest swimmer just left. If the comity issue consists of Massachusetts and Connecticut residents relocating, then it’s more likely that the court would order an exception to the law than strike it down. Most States don’t recognize common law marriages. However, if you live in a State that does, and one forms, your marriage is still valid if you move to a State that otherwise doesn’t. The Comity Clause doesn’t strike down your new State’s marriage law; it just requires an exception to be made. For a law to be struck down entirely, it has to be invalid on its face– the need to recognize an exception when there is a conflict with another law in some circumstances generally doesn’t do it, and even if one portion of a law is found unconstitutional (as by conflict with the Comity Clause) the balance is left undisturbed. A court would probably not strike down the new California Constitutional definition of marriage even if it decided that California had to recognize sister state marriages. Jerry Brown is right (not something I say every day) that the existing marriages will likely remain in effect; again, comparing it to common law marriage, the States that have abolished it still recognize ones that came into effect before it was abolished in their states.
The only way that Proposition 8 is whacked on Federal grounds is if the Court rules that Romer kills the existing precedent denying a Federal right to same sex marriage. Given that O’Connor (who disavowed that interpretation of Romer in her Lawrence concurrence anyway) has been replaced by Alito, and Kennedy (who wrote both Romer and Lawrence) semi-denied that application in his majority opinion, I don’t think that’s super-likely. I think it’s far more likely that anti-gay-marriage groups will be lobbying a pair of New England States to change and make the whole comity issue go away entirely. (Frankly I don’t think they’ll succeed either, but who wants to put money on them not trying? Anyone?)
In the end he may even have to be tossed aside–it’s part of the job.
It was interesting to read on Wikipedia that the average “lifespan” of a Chief of Staff is all of 2.5 years, whether from being canned or having had enough of the job.
Bush Jr. is on his 2nd Chief, Clinton had 4, and Bush Sr. had 3. And yet, I couldn’t name any of them; it seems to be a rather thankless job.
As for the Muslim world, Amhawhatever from Iran even congratulated Obama – which I suppose is completely open to interpretation. 🙂
In the end he may even have to be tossed aside–it’s part of the job.
It was interesting to read on Wikipedia that the average “lifespan” of a Chief of Staff is all of 2.5 years, whether from being canned or having had enough of the job.
Bush Jr. is on his 2nd Chief, Clinton had 4, and Bush Sr. had 3. And yet, I couldn’t name any of them; it seems to be a rather thankless job.
As for the Muslim world, Amhawhatever from Iran even congratulated Obama – which I suppose is completely open to interpretation. 🙂
“Saturday and Sunday are considered the Sabbath by large numbers of voters. Some Jewish groups wouldn’t be able to vote on Saturday”
Pre-poll voting or apply for a postal vote if you can’t attend a place of polling. Last State Election, we were going to be in another State on Election day, so we went to the Electoral Office for our Electorate, and voted there prior to the actual polling day.
I’m interested in Oregon’s 100% mail-in vote. No lines, everyone can vote when it is convenient, and it’s muuuuch cheaper. So far I haven’t heard of them having any significant problems with it.
Dennis V wrote: Hey AJ, where do you get your news from? It can’t be very credible since these idiot white supremacists have been in jail and are facing charges of plotting to kill a presidental candidate (among other charges). Sorry to burst your Bush hating bubble.
No, Dennis, I’m talking about the FIRST, far more credible, assassination attempt in Denver. Y’know? Where two “meth heads” were caught having traveled to Denver with a high powered rifle, talking about shooting Obama during his acceptance speech? Wow, they say it didn’t get much coverage and this goes to show they’re right. Here’s a link for you’re edification: http://firedoglake.com/2008/09/18/can-bushs-justice-department-do-its-job-when-it-comes-to-protecting-barack-obama/
I don’t know if this is considered a “left-wing” source by you, but this is the first summary of the facts I could lay my hands on. I heard all the basics off of the mainstream media. It’s almost as though the prosecuters were switched through time and space … the white supremists were the ones who were actually talking through their hats.
2) Roger Tang wrote: And the relative strength of the dollar has absolutely nothing to do with it, either, right? (regarding the fall in gas prices)
OK, like McCain, I don’t claim to be an expert on the economy. But I do pay attention to the news, and have the decidedly non-Republican ability to take two conflicting statements and judge that one of them must be false. When the price of gas was going up, the media and pundits were blaming the weak dollar (and Chinese demand, also). Now the price of gas is going down, and you claim it’s the weak dollar? That’s right up there with my Republican friends who breathlessly inform me of the statements of Obama’s religious leader, REV. Wright, and then a few months later come up to me and tell me he’s a muslim. Excuse me? Didn’t you just tell me he was going to a Christian church?
Or my all-time favorite, Sadaam has WMD and we have to go in there and get them. Excuse me? If he has WMD, and we tell him we’re attacking his homeland to take him out, will he not at the very least use the WMD on our advancing troops? Is this not the very reason that we’ve never invaded a country that has WMD before, no matter how despicable they are? Oh, wait, Bush is going to go ahead and send our troops into this meatgrinder? Then he’s either 1) looking for an excuse to use nukes on Iraq (the threat of which wouldn’t deter a country that’s being invaded anyway — they got nothing to lose) or 2) he knows that Sadaam doesn’t have WMD in the first place. You don’t have to be Spock to use simple logic. (BTW, I’m open to a credible attack on this logic, since I think it’s flawless but I obviously think I’m smarter than most people. “Maybe the Bush administration had secret knowledge that caused them to invade” doesn’t count, since the people who postulate that can’t come up with a hypothetical fact that would justify sending our troops to certain doom.)
• 
It looks like Fox News has started to cut Palin off from the republican base. They reported amogn other things she needed to be informed Canada, the US, and Mexico formed NAFTA, and that Africa wasn’t a country: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ezh2SNwPcKc
Alan, have you stocked up on your “Obama bin Lyin'” t-shirts yet? You like to employ logic barked at that level of integrity, so you must be sold.
Sorry all, but Arnold doesn’t have a veto on propositions. They are a direct form of democracy, for good or bad, and automatically become state law. Your only hope is that the California Supreme court (who started this mess) will overturn the proposition by declaring it unconstitutional. But then, how do you declare a direct addition to the constitution unconstitutional?
Well, it seems that California law specifies that any initiative that would require “revision” of the state Constitution must be passed by the Legislature before going to the voters. That’s how the last two such initiatives were overthrown – they were attempts to revise the relevant section of the Constitution, as they sought to not only bar gay marriage, but also specifically remove sexual orientation as a “protected class” under the state’s equality laws.
There is some question as to whether Prop 8 oversteps its bounds by the same degree – a question which will ultimately have to be settled by the California Supreme Court, I would assume.
I still look forward to the day that the Supreme Court agrees to hear a suit over one or more of these discriminatory initiatives, and strikes them all down as being in clear violation of Article IV, Section 1…
Alan, don’t bother, just ignore the little rodent and it will starve to death…
Although after another poster in a different thread said talking to it might push it over the edge I had considered taking a two-week vacation to talk to it constantly to induce suicide…
(my apologies to rats, hamsters, etc. for lumping that thing into your category)
Alan, don’t bother, just ignore the little rodent and it will starve to death…
Although after another poster in a different thread said talking to it might push it over the edge I had considered taking a two-week vacation to talk to it constantly to induce suicide…
(my apologies to rats, hamsters, etc. for lumping that thing into your category)
Luigi Novi: What exactly does the word “mandate” even mean in this context?
It’s like “winning” the war in Iraq, even though nobody can define what “winning” is! 😉
Luigi Novi: What exactly does the word “mandate” even mean in this context?
It’s like “winning” the war in Iraq, even though nobody can define what “winning” is! 😉
It puts the lotion on its skin. It does this whenever it’s told.
“You are a fûçkìņg idiot if you actually believe that just bacause the “majority” says so, that makes it right….”
So… You’re saying that McCain should be POTUS then?
“Make Election Day a Holiday and require employers to give workers the day off or something…”
I’ve seen talk in some circles from people who want to move Election Day to the weekend. That would make some sense since the world that made the system we use now has faded into the twilight of history and a Saturday Election Day would disrupt work days, schools and other schedules far less than it does now.
Of course, the lines really would be killers then…
“You are a fûçkìņg idiot if you actually believe that just bacause the “majority” says so, that makes it right….”
So… You’re saying that McCain should be POTUS then?
“Make Election Day a Holiday and require employers to give workers the day off or something…”
I’ve seen talk in some circles from people who want to move Election Day to the weekend. That would make some sense since the world that made the system we use now has faded into the twilight of history and a Saturday Election Day would disrupt work days, schools and other schedules far less than it does now.
Of course, the lines really would be killers then…
“Saturday Election Day would disrupt work days, schools and other schedules far less than it does now.”
Ours are held on Saturdays (Federal, State and LG).
It doesn’t mean it’s right, either, as you seem to think.
In particular, I’m not sure individual rights, particularly those as basic as marriage, should be subject to majority votes. That’s why the BIll of Rights was instituted after all.
And I am quite aware that the vast majority of the West Coast, 90%+, was all for interning Japanese Americans in World War II. And I will scream, for the rest of my life, that doing THAT was a serious wrong that should never have happened.
Some comedic highlights from the day…
Rush Limbaugh: “John McCain’s campaign staff has spent more time attacking Sarah Palin than they spent combined on Wright, Ayers, Dohrn, Khalidi, Klonsky, Frank Marshall Davis, and Obama himself! The moderates and blue-bloods in the GOP are suicidal. They’re going to fight us harder than they fought Obama. Are we ready for this? Hëll, yes, we’re ready! Yes, we can!”
I only quote Limbaugh here since, despite his irrelevancy and stupidity, he’s not the only one talking like this. He does have the biggest radio ratings of anyone saying it though. I’ve been seeing and hearing this for two days now from a lot of places and it’s making me laugh hysterically. Unless this is simply an extremely bitter family spat that will go away in a short time; the Republicans and their various spokesman and pundits all seemed poised to start a small civil war within the party around the pro-Sarah Palin faction and the various other factions.
I’m actually finding the prospects of this possibility very fascinating. My disenchantment with the Republican started in a major way with Newt and really took a downturn with W. and his crew taking office. He issues I had with them pretty much all stemmed from the fact that the most ideologically stupid extremes of the party were the ones giving us our leadership options. Now the extreme fringe is blaming the moderates for their losses this year rather than realizing that it was the extreme fringe that killed them and the fight that’s being lined up in the Conservative Movement, if it comes to pass, seems to be the extreme @$$holes VS the more moderate right.
Now the other side isn’t without issues either. The Democrats have been floating leadership that’s sometimes too far to the left of the mainstream to be truly appealing without a boogyman like W. in office, but their failings are that they don’t seem to see that themselves.
That’s all the build up. Here’s the question. Could we finally be, hopefully be, on the cusp of seeing the birth of a viable third party? If the Republican Party and its most vocal supporters create a massive rift where the more moderate members are being attacked by the party leadership and by the party’s mouthpieces in the media; could they strike out on their own? Would they be more likely to strike out on their own if moderate Democrats, conservative Democrats, in the party express interest in joining them to create a new party? And, perhaps most importantly, is there anyone out there right now who has the charisma and political stroke to spearhead this?
It may only be a pipedream, but as someone who has long since tired of the both the Democratic and Republican parties, it’s surely something I’d love to see come out of this.
I know you’re smarter than that Jerry, so assume you’re being sarcastic. Unless you equate basic human rights and John McCain as the same thing…
I know you’re smarter than that Jerry, so assume you’re being sarcastic. Unless you equate basic human rights and John McCain as the same thing…
Married people have rights, but marriage literally isn’t a right. Rights aren’t licensed.
Bladestar: “I know you’re smarter than that Jerry, so assume you’re being sarcastic.”
Yes and no. I disagree with Prop 8, but I don’t see the need to broadbrush everyone who voted for it. Living in Virginia, I’m getting earfuls from all sides in the most foul and abusive terms about how the majority was wrong and that etc, etc, etc. Yeah, there were some idiots and some bigots that voted for the thing, but most of the people were neither of those any more than the majority of people who voted for Obama were socialists, idiots or voting for him based on their shared skin color with him.
They voted. I disagree with their choice and I think it should be challenged on the Constitutionality of it. But the bile and venom is getting thick enough this week without the left doing everything they can to add to it as well.
Bladestar: “I know you’re smarter than that Jerry, so assume you’re being sarcastic.”
Yes and no. I disagree with Prop 8, but I don’t see the need to broadbrush everyone who voted for it. Living in Virginia, I’m getting earfuls from all sides in the most foul and abusive terms about how the majority was wrong and that etc, etc, etc. Yeah, there were some idiots and some bigots that voted for the thing, but most of the people were neither of those any more than the majority of people who voted for Obama were socialists, idiots or voting for him based on their shared skin color with him.
They voted. I disagree with their choice and I think it should be challenged on the Constitutionality of it. But the bile and venom is getting thick enough this week without the left doing everything they can to add to it as well.
Jerry Pournelle says here that “Obama is saying they intend to confiscate 401(k) accounts” (I think someone’s been playing the Telephone Game again), and that good Conservatives like himself, Sarah Palin, Newt Gingrich, etc. need to build a New Republican Party, shutting out the New England (if any remain after this election) and “Country Club” Republicans such as the Bushes, in order to fight Obama and the “rapacious wolves” of the Democratic Party.
I suspect (and it’s just that, a suspicion, nothing more) that the “Obama will steal your 401(k) money” meme is a talking point which was held in reserve in the event that he won the election, so that there would be a fresh, unused rumor immediately available for sabotaging his administration from the start — even if he denies it, it’ll get spread anyway just as with the “secret Muslim” and “palling around with Bill Ayres” memes.
I can’t see how anyone can call 52% a clear majority.
Well, it’s enough of a majority that certain political parties can’t sneak an illegal victory out of it. One million or 10 million, it couldn’t be faked through recounts and court-appointed cronies.
If Obama only got 60 million votes, then only 20% of Americans voted for him.
Really? Then the election was rigged, because 300 million US citizens are not eligible to vote – you’d have to include all non-citizens and infants to get that number. About 1.1 million voters actually voted (McCain votes + Obama votes, not counting any bizarre abstainers or the phantom double or triple registrees), so statistics can only be compared to this number.
No one screamed or swore harder than I did following the 2000 and 2004 elections, but I did not fall into the utter hatred and nastiness I’ve seen and read about on some of the news sites that the McCain supporters are supposedly voicing. I’m appalled at even the idea that these people were – and still are – crying and wailing and praying and threatening over it. I had a patron, an elderly gentleman, informing me in exquisite detail why Tuesday was the darkest day this country had ever seen, and he wasn’t making a pun. What is so difficult about accepting that your team lost? Are these the same people that riot when they lose a sports event? (My instincts say yes, but I only follow Formula One and they don’t riot). The majority spoke. The electoral college spoke. Even Alaska didn’t vote for Palin by a big margin (as opposed to the 92% for Obama in DC). If anyone ever had a right to have a major case of sour grapes, it was Gore in 2000, but he didn’t. While McCain responded with grace and class, his groupies are rapidly losing my sympathy and gaining only my disgust. It’s done, it’s over, move on.
“The darkest day in our history”?
Darker than April 12, 1861?
Darker than October 29, 1929?
Darker than December 7, 1941?
Darker than September 11, 2001?
Huh???
“The darkest day in our history”?
Darker than April 12, 1861?
Darker than October 29, 1929?
Darker than December 7, 1941?
Darker than September 11, 2001?
Huh???
October 24, 1929 – stupid keyboard…
October 24, 1929 – stupid keyboard…
Alan Coil: If Obama only got 60 million votes, then only 20% of Americans voted for him
Luigi Novi: Only if you imagine that every U.S. citizen is of voting age, and ended up voting. Since this is not the case, one must use 146,763,383 as the 100%, since that’s how many voted, and given that, Obama got 52.5% of the vote, since 64,629,649 voted for him. (http://tinyurl.com/6okgs5)
Sam Wurzelbacher: “I asked what every Joe in America wanted to ask him and for that I was made an example by the media for asking that simple question, because no one in the media was asking him this,”
Luigi Novi: No. You were made an example of because your claims were found to be bogus, because it was found that you wouldn’t be affected by Obama’s tax plans, and because you were revealed to be an inarticulate retard who makes intellectually dubious statements, like agreeing that Obama is a threat to Israel, like claiming when this is questioned that other people should come up with reasons why you say things like this, and “more people know about me than Obama.”
Sam Wurzelbacher: “[the] media has been against [President] Bush throughout and before his first election in 2000, with the exception of 9/11, period.”
Luigi Novi: No, the media just reported that the country was, and with evidently valid reasons.
Susan O: “I had a patron, an elderly gentleman, informing me in exquisite detail why Tuesday was the darkest day this country had ever seen, and he wasn’t making a pun. What is so difficult about accepting that your team lost?”
It’s not just the “team” that they’re bitter over, Susan, it’s the myth of Obama that they’re afraid of. I have an aunt and uncle who still, no matter how many times it has been corrected, believe that they are seeing a radical Muslim with extremely strong ties to foreign and domestic terrorists being placed in the highest political office in our country. I know people young and old who will tell you right now that Obama has no documentation of proof that he was born of a legal American birth and is an American citizen. They’ll also be the first to tell you that it has been proven that he was born in Kenya. I can introduce you to people that will tell you with a completely straight face that Obama is the anti-Christ and that the Book of Revelation clearly spells it out even though most of what they cite is no where to be found in the thing. I can introduce you to many people on the right who, like their many counterparts on the Left, only get their information from a steady stream of “honest” media sources that in all reality are patrician liars that are spinning facts and feeding an audience the falsehoods that the audience desperately wants to be fed.
Too many people on both sides don’t want to take the time to learn the truth or to even hear the truth. Once they’ve made up their minds about what the “real truth” is there’s no easy way to pull them back from the brink this early in the game. Hëll, some of them may never come back from the brink.
Susan O: “I had a patron, an elderly gentleman, informing me in exquisite detail why Tuesday was the darkest day this country had ever seen, and he wasn’t making a pun. What is so difficult about accepting that your team lost?”
It’s not just the “team” that they’re bitter over, Susan, it’s the myth of Obama that they’re afraid of. I have an aunt and uncle who still, no matter how many times it has been corrected, believe that they are seeing a radical Muslim with extremely strong ties to foreign and domestic terrorists being placed in the highest political office in our country. I know people young and old who will tell you right now that Obama has no documentation of proof that he was born of a legal American birth and is an American citizen. They’ll also be the first to tell you that it has been proven that he was born in Kenya. I can introduce you to people that will tell you with a completely straight face that Obama is the anti-Christ and that the Book of Revelation clearly spells it out even though most of what they cite is no where to be found in the thing. I can introduce you to many people on the right who, like their many counterparts on the Left, only get their information from a steady stream of “honest” media sources that in all reality are patrician liars that are spinning facts and feeding an audience the falsehoods that the audience desperately wants to be fed.
Too many people on both sides don’t want to take the time to learn the truth or to even hear the truth. Once they’ve made up their minds about what the “real truth” is there’s no easy way to pull them back from the brink this early in the game. Hëll, some of them may never come back from the brink.
Alan Coil: “If Obama only got 60 million votes, then only 20% of Americans voted for him”
As of this moment with 98% of the votes reported.
Obama – 64,643,455 votes
McCain – 56,903,815 votes
Okay, let’s say that Obama only had 20% of America vote for him. McCain got even less than that. Besides, what’s the point here? Anyone who could vote but didn’t (A) doesn’t count and (B) can’t be used as a debating point here since, having not voted, no one can really say if they were for Obama or not or if they were at least likely to lean more towards Obama than they would McCain or not.
You, me and the kitchen sink are stuck with the facts that we’ve got and the facts that we have are the final vote and a few polls here and there. Those facts say that Obama won by 53% to 46% and by, at this time, just shy of 8 million votes.
Alan Coil: “If Obama only got 60 million votes, then only 20% of Americans voted for him”
As of this moment with 98% of the votes reported.
Obama – 64,643,455 votes
McCain – 56,903,815 votes
Okay, let’s say that Obama only had 20% of America vote for him. McCain got even less than that. Besides, what’s the point here? Anyone who could vote but didn’t (A) doesn’t count and (B) can’t be used as a debating point here since, having not voted, no one can really say if they were for Obama or not or if they were at least likely to lean more towards Obama than they would McCain or not.
You, me and the kitchen sink are stuck with the facts that we’ve got and the facts that we have are the final vote and a few polls here and there. Those facts say that Obama won by 53% to 46% and by, at this time, just shy of 8 million votes.
God this is funny. Hannity is going insane. He’s on Fox now having a conniption fit over Rahm Emanuel getting a big spot in Obama’s staff. What’s his big talking point? Rahm once told Republicans to go ‘F themselves” and that’s just so beneath the pail. That’s Obama “The Radical” showing his head and a sign that there is no bipartisan spirit here.
This brain dead hack is the same two faced political talker who was ecstatic that Cheney told Congressional Democrats on the Senate floor itself to “F themselves” and claimed that this was a great thing that showed the backbone and fighting spirit of the VP.
Yet another time that I’m disappointed that Colmes doesn’t show the side of himself on TV that he displays on his radio program.
politicalticker.blogs.cnn.com/2008/11/06/report-08-turnout-same-or-only-slightly-higher-than-04/
So, surprisingly, for all the talk about new voters and excitement, the actual turnout was only slightly higher than last time. It looks like 60% plus or minus a few is the best we will get.
(Which also means that nobody will ever get enough to satisfy those who play with the numbers in the way Jerry mentions. If a candidate got 75% of the vote–impressive under any circumstances–if only 60% of those eligible voted people will still be able to say that 65% of eligible voters did not vote for the winner.
They can say it. It’s even true. But it tells you more about the teller than it does about anything else.
No one screamed or swore harder than I did following the 2000 and 2004 elections, but I did not fall into the utter hatred and nastiness I’ve seen and read about on some of the news sites that the McCain supporters are supposedly voicing. I’m appalled at even the idea that these people were – and still are – crying and wailing and praying and threatening over it.
I haven’t seen much of that at all but maybe the conservative sites I look at aren’t as nuts as the one’s you’ve seen. certainly I haven’t seen any of them threaten to move to another country or blame the loss on Diebold machines (Ðámņ, how did the Nexis of Evil Neocons not play that trump card???) or voice fears of a coming civil war…and mind you, all that came up from liberals I actually respect only 4 years ago. But certainly it’s true that any conservatives who did not learn from how foolish their opponents looked back then deserve all the derision one cares to heap on them. More, since they really ought to know better.
Rahm Emanuel is a smart pick. The classic “bad cop”. He also should calm the nerves od anyone afraid that Obama is not sufficiently pro-Israel. Emanuel volunteered for the Israel Defense Forces during the first Gulf War.
He’s also said to have been an inspiration for one of the characters in The West Wing. I don’t know if that’s true but I do know that his brother inspired a character in Entourage.
He won’t be popular with everyone, including a lot of Democrats but that’s part of the job.
Rahm Emanuel is a smart pick. The classic “bad cop”. He also should calm the nerves od anyone afraid that Obama is not sufficiently pro-Israel. Emanuel volunteered for the Israel Defense Forces during the first Gulf War.
He’s also said to have been an inspiration for one of the characters in The West Wing. I don’t know if that’s true but I do know that his brother inspired a character in Entourage.
He won’t be popular with everyone, including a lot of Democrats but that’s part of the job.
That boils down to a question that does not have a definite answer – who’s opinion is more important, the courts, or the voters?
No, it doesn’t. It boils down to the tendency of the majority to be poor protectors of the rights of the minorities.
PAD
That boils down to a question that does not have a definite answer – who’s opinion is more important, the courts, or the voters?
No, it doesn’t. It boils down to the tendency of the majority to be poor protectors of the rights of the minorities.
PAD
Rahm Emanuel is a smart pick.
Who, as Jerry also pointed out, is already being painted as a left-wing nutjob and that Obama is going back on his promise of bipartisanship.
Never mind that we don’t know what the rest of the makeup of Obama’s cabinet will be.
Hëll, even that ‘dámņëd liberal media’, the AP, had an article earlier today that put forth the same argument.
Rahm Emanuel is a smart pick.
Who, as Jerry also pointed out, is already being painted as a left-wing nutjob and that Obama is going back on his promise of bipartisanship.
Never mind that we don’t know what the rest of the makeup of Obama’s cabinet will be.
Hëll, even that ‘dámņëd liberal media’, the AP, had an article earlier today that put forth the same argument.
Started to watch the post-election coverage, then had to stop almost immediately. They were showing an almost empty Republican headquarters with one representative saying how Democratic control in all three branches of tghe government is “bad” for this country because it “destroys the very idea of checks and balances”.
Huh? What? This from people who were so concerned over losing THEIR control over all three branches not 4 years ago?
Don’t know why I should be surprised over people who made such a big issue over whether Bill “inhaled” or not in his youth, but glossed over W’s alcohol and coke use with “We believe the president’s past character shouldn’t be called into question as it has no bearing on the current situation.”
”Hëll, even that ‘dámņëd liberal media’, the AP, had an article earlier today that put forth the same argument.”
Stuff that argument. The funniest one I’ve heard so far from some Rightwing talkers is that Obama picking Rahm is a bad thing because it’s going to upset the Muslim world or make them very nervous/aggressive about us. You’ve gotta laugh when this is coming from the same guys who painted a picture of Obama as a closet Muslim and/or someone with possible ties to Muslim extremists up to a week before the election.
I voted for McCain, and yes I am disappointed that he didn’t win, but I don’t see it as the end of the world like some people do.
I can just tip my hat and say congratulations President Obama.
I don’t think one has to be terribly right wing to see Rahm as a partisan hatchet man. When Paul Begala describes you as a “cross between a hemorrhoid and a toothache.” you know it isn’t just Hannity that thinks he’s ruffled a few feathers. But as I said, that’s what Obama needs, a hatchet man to play bad cop. It probably won’t be republicans who feel his toughest bites. In the end he may even have to be tossed aside–it’s part of the job. These things often end badly. In return he gets to be a powerful part of the team, more influential than a mere representative could ever hope to be.
The funniest one I’ve heard so far from some Rightwing talkers is that Obama picking Rahm is a bad thing because it’s going to upset the Muslim world or make them very nervous/aggressive about us.
Making certain elements in the “Muslim world” nervous about us won’t cost me much sleep. Speaking of which, adieu for now. Gonna be an interesting 4 years…but aren’t they always?
I don’t think one has to be terribly right wing to see Rahm as a partisan hatchet man. When Paul Begala describes you as a “cross between a hemorrhoid and a toothache.” you know it isn’t just Hannity that thinks he’s ruffled a few feathers. But as I said, that’s what Obama needs, a hatchet man to play bad cop. It probably won’t be republicans who feel his toughest bites. In the end he may even have to be tossed aside–it’s part of the job. These things often end badly. In return he gets to be a powerful part of the team, more influential than a mere representative could ever hope to be.
The funniest one I’ve heard so far from some Rightwing talkers is that Obama picking Rahm is a bad thing because it’s going to upset the Muslim world or make them very nervous/aggressive about us.
Making certain elements in the “Muslim world” nervous about us won’t cost me much sleep. Speaking of which, adieu for now. Gonna be an interesting 4 years…but aren’t they always?
AJ claimed: 1) How soon before the second asassination attempt? (Especially since the Bush DOJ doesn’t seem interested in prosecuting the first one.)
Hey AJ, where do you get your news from? It can’t be very credible since these idiot white supremacists have been in jail and are facing charges of plotting to kill a presidental candidate (among other charges). Sorry to burst your Bush hating bubble. And here’s a link:
http://www.cnn.com/2008/CRIME/10/27/obama.plot/index.html
Wow, general Zod’s concession speech was a lot less classy than McCain’s:
http://zod2008.com/
“You shall pay for your insolence! You! And one day, your heirs!”
Defeated presidential candidate unleashes wrath at a traitorous America
It boils down to the tendency of the majority to be poor protectors of the rights of the minorities.
Doesn’t that beg the question, though, of who gets to decide what rights the minorities (or anyone else for that matter) actually do or should have? We have a constitution and minority protection because, at some point, the majority decided that would be a good idea and wrote it into the law. (Although the Republicans had to be kind of sneaky to get the 14th Amendment enacted.)
Trust the American people. We have a staggeringly good record of doing the right thing. It just takes us a while sometimes. (Like those 40 consecutive years the Democrats held the House. Hopefully it’ll go a bit quicker this time.) That may be of limited comfort to the people who suffer through the “a while,” but that doesn’t justify throwing out the democracy with the bath water.
Saturday Election Day would disrupt work days, schools and other schedules far less than it does now.
The problem with weekend voting is that both Saturday and Sunday are considered the Sabbath by large numbers of voters. Some Jewish groups wouldn’t be able to vote on Saturday. I remember that when I was in college, the security system for the dorms had to make special provisions on Saturdays, because some of the students couldn’t swipe their ID cards through the reader. I think voting machines would be at least as big a problem, as might traveling to the polling place.
I don’t see much of a need to promote voting more than we do. Most jurisdictions are moving to “no-excuse” absentee voting, which is a good thing. But it really leaves “no excuse.” As in, you have no excuse not to vote. If you can’t be motivated to vote at some point during the month leading up to an election, maybe your voice doesn’t need to be heard. Just a thought.
Rich: We vote for a reason. Majority wins.
Luigi Novi: Unless the majority wishes something that violates the Constitution. Then it loses.
But the majority determines the Constitution to begin with. Not just with regard to amendments like Proposition 8, but with ratification of the thing when it was first drafted. The Continental Congress referred the proposed Constitution to the States to be voted on. Federal Constitutional amendments are voted on in Congress, then referred to the States, where a supermajority of the States have to vote to ratify them before they come into effect. (Unless the amendment comes through constitutional conventions, which is even more populist/majoritarian than the usual model.) It’s not as though Zeus sent the Constitution down on a thunderbolt. It’s fundamental legislation, but it’s still legislation.
As it usually has.
Huh?
On behalf of the world, or at least my corner of it, I want to thank the United States of America for getting it right.
Some 48 % of us aren’t completely sold on the idea that we got it right. Personally I was close to tears at the thought that my country was now in the hands of Nancy Pelosi and Harry Reid, with no opponent in the White House to keep them in check, but maybe I didn’t “get it right.” We’ll see. In any event, your concern for our domestic politics is touching. I’m off to write an editorial for David Cameron, myself.
I hope Obama survives the first term. Hëll, the first year. Double-hëll, the first MONTH! Those gun laws of yours need to be replaced…
1) I’m pretty sure the Secret Service is making some effort to secure the President-elect’s life expectancy. Call it a hunch.
2) If you don’t live here, why do you care what our gun laws are?
I still look forward to the day that the Supreme Court agrees to hear a suit over one or more of these discriminatory initiatives, and strikes them all down as being in clear violation of Article IV, Section 1…
The Comity Clause? I think DOMA violates it, but there’s only a comity question if either (a) DOMA is struck down– a distinct possibility– and (b) there exists a pool of States that legalize gay marriage. That pool’s largest swimmer just left. If the comity issue consists of Massachusetts and Connecticut residents relocating, then it’s more likely that the court would order an exception to the law than strike it down. Most States don’t recognize common law marriages. However, if you live in a State that does, and one forms, your marriage is still valid if you move to a State that otherwise doesn’t. The Comity Clause doesn’t strike down your new State’s marriage law; it just requires an exception to be made. For a law to be struck down entirely, it has to be invalid on its face– the need to recognize an exception when there is a conflict with another law in some circumstances generally doesn’t do it, and even if one portion of a law is found unconstitutional (as by conflict with the Comity Clause) the balance is left undisturbed. A court would probably not strike down the new California Constitutional definition of marriage even if it decided that California had to recognize sister state marriages. Jerry Brown is right (not something I say every day) that the existing marriages will likely remain in effect; again, comparing it to common law marriage, the States that have abolished it still recognize ones that came into effect before it was abolished in their states.
The only way that Proposition 8 is whacked on Federal grounds is if the Court rules that Romer kills the existing precedent denying a Federal right to same sex marriage. Given that O’Connor (who disavowed that interpretation of Romer in her Lawrence concurrence anyway) has been replaced by Alito, and Kennedy (who wrote both Romer and Lawrence) semi-denied that application in his majority opinion, I don’t think that’s super-likely. I think it’s far more likely that anti-gay-marriage groups will be lobbying a pair of New England States to change and make the whole comity issue go away entirely. (Frankly I don’t think they’ll succeed either, but who wants to put money on them not trying? Anyone?)
It boils down to the tendency of the majority to be poor protectors of the rights of the minorities.
Doesn’t that beg the question, though, of who gets to decide what rights the minorities (or anyone else for that matter) actually do or should have? We have a constitution and minority protection because, at some point, the majority decided that would be a good idea and wrote it into the law. (Although the Republicans had to be kind of sneaky to get the 14th Amendment enacted.)
Trust the American people. We have a staggeringly good record of doing the right thing. It just takes us a while sometimes. (Like those 40 consecutive years the Democrats held the House. Hopefully it’ll go a bit quicker this time.) That may be of limited comfort to the people who suffer through the “a while,” but that doesn’t justify throwing out the democracy with the bath water.
Saturday Election Day would disrupt work days, schools and other schedules far less than it does now.
The problem with weekend voting is that both Saturday and Sunday are considered the Sabbath by large numbers of voters. Some Jewish groups wouldn’t be able to vote on Saturday. I remember that when I was in college, the security system for the dorms had to make special provisions on Saturdays, because some of the students couldn’t swipe their ID cards through the reader. I think voting machines would be at least as big a problem, as might traveling to the polling place.
I don’t see much of a need to promote voting more than we do. Most jurisdictions are moving to “no-excuse” absentee voting, which is a good thing. But it really leaves “no excuse.” As in, you have no excuse not to vote. If you can’t be motivated to vote at some point during the month leading up to an election, maybe your voice doesn’t need to be heard. Just a thought.
Rich: We vote for a reason. Majority wins.
Luigi Novi: Unless the majority wishes something that violates the Constitution. Then it loses.
But the majority determines the Constitution to begin with. Not just with regard to amendments like Proposition 8, but with ratification of the thing when it was first drafted. The Continental Congress referred the proposed Constitution to the States to be voted on. Federal Constitutional amendments are voted on in Congress, then referred to the States, where a supermajority of the States have to vote to ratify them before they come into effect. (Unless the amendment comes through constitutional conventions, which is even more populist/majoritarian than the usual model.) It’s not as though Zeus sent the Constitution down on a thunderbolt. It’s fundamental legislation, but it’s still legislation.
As it usually has.
Huh?
On behalf of the world, or at least my corner of it, I want to thank the United States of America for getting it right.
Some 48 % of us aren’t completely sold on the idea that we got it right. Personally I was close to tears at the thought that my country was now in the hands of Nancy Pelosi and Harry Reid, with no opponent in the White House to keep them in check, but maybe I didn’t “get it right.” We’ll see. In any event, your concern for our domestic politics is touching. I’m off to write an editorial for David Cameron, myself.
I hope Obama survives the first term. Hëll, the first year. Double-hëll, the first MONTH! Those gun laws of yours need to be replaced…
1) I’m pretty sure the Secret Service is making some effort to secure the President-elect’s life expectancy. Call it a hunch.
2) If you don’t live here, why do you care what our gun laws are?
I still look forward to the day that the Supreme Court agrees to hear a suit over one or more of these discriminatory initiatives, and strikes them all down as being in clear violation of Article IV, Section 1…
The Comity Clause? I think DOMA violates it, but there’s only a comity question if either (a) DOMA is struck down– a distinct possibility– and (b) there exists a pool of States that legalize gay marriage. That pool’s largest swimmer just left. If the comity issue consists of Massachusetts and Connecticut residents relocating, then it’s more likely that the court would order an exception to the law than strike it down. Most States don’t recognize common law marriages. However, if you live in a State that does, and one forms, your marriage is still valid if you move to a State that otherwise doesn’t. The Comity Clause doesn’t strike down your new State’s marriage law; it just requires an exception to be made. For a law to be struck down entirely, it has to be invalid on its face– the need to recognize an exception when there is a conflict with another law in some circumstances generally doesn’t do it, and even if one portion of a law is found unconstitutional (as by conflict with the Comity Clause) the balance is left undisturbed. A court would probably not strike down the new California Constitutional definition of marriage even if it decided that California had to recognize sister state marriages. Jerry Brown is right (not something I say every day) that the existing marriages will likely remain in effect; again, comparing it to common law marriage, the States that have abolished it still recognize ones that came into effect before it was abolished in their states.
The only way that Proposition 8 is whacked on Federal grounds is if the Court rules that Romer kills the existing precedent denying a Federal right to same sex marriage. Given that O’Connor (who disavowed that interpretation of Romer in her Lawrence concurrence anyway) has been replaced by Alito, and Kennedy (who wrote both Romer and Lawrence) semi-denied that application in his majority opinion, I don’t think that’s super-likely. I think it’s far more likely that anti-gay-marriage groups will be lobbying a pair of New England States to change and make the whole comity issue go away entirely. (Frankly I don’t think they’ll succeed either, but who wants to put money on them not trying? Anyone?)
In the end he may even have to be tossed aside–it’s part of the job.
It was interesting to read on Wikipedia that the average “lifespan” of a Chief of Staff is all of 2.5 years, whether from being canned or having had enough of the job.
Bush Jr. is on his 2nd Chief, Clinton had 4, and Bush Sr. had 3. And yet, I couldn’t name any of them; it seems to be a rather thankless job.
As for the Muslim world, Amhawhatever from Iran even congratulated Obama – which I suppose is completely open to interpretation. 🙂
In the end he may even have to be tossed aside–it’s part of the job.
It was interesting to read on Wikipedia that the average “lifespan” of a Chief of Staff is all of 2.5 years, whether from being canned or having had enough of the job.
Bush Jr. is on his 2nd Chief, Clinton had 4, and Bush Sr. had 3. And yet, I couldn’t name any of them; it seems to be a rather thankless job.
As for the Muslim world, Amhawhatever from Iran even congratulated Obama – which I suppose is completely open to interpretation. 🙂
“Saturday and Sunday are considered the Sabbath by large numbers of voters. Some Jewish groups wouldn’t be able to vote on Saturday”
Pre-poll voting or apply for a postal vote if you can’t attend a place of polling. Last State Election, we were going to be in another State on Election day, so we went to the Electoral Office for our Electorate, and voted there prior to the actual polling day.
I’m interested in Oregon’s 100% mail-in vote. No lines, everyone can vote when it is convenient, and it’s muuuuch cheaper. So far I haven’t heard of them having any significant problems with it.
Dennis V wrote: Hey AJ, where do you get your news from? It can’t be very credible since these idiot white supremacists have been in jail and are facing charges of plotting to kill a presidental candidate (among other charges). Sorry to burst your Bush hating bubble.
No, Dennis, I’m talking about the FIRST, far more credible, assassination attempt in Denver. Y’know? Where two “meth heads” were caught having traveled to Denver with a high powered rifle, talking about shooting Obama during his acceptance speech? Wow, they say it didn’t get much coverage and this goes to show they’re right. Here’s a link for you’re edification: http://firedoglake.com/2008/09/18/can-bushs-justice-department-do-its-job-when-it-comes-to-protecting-barack-obama/
I don’t know if this is considered a “left-wing” source by you, but this is the first summary of the facts I could lay my hands on. I heard all the basics off of the mainstream media. It’s almost as though the prosecuters were switched through time and space … the white supremists were the ones who were actually talking through their hats.
2) Roger Tang wrote: And the relative strength of the dollar has absolutely nothing to do with it, either, right? (regarding the fall in gas prices)
OK, like McCain, I don’t claim to be an expert on the economy. But I do pay attention to the news, and have the decidedly non-Republican ability to take two conflicting statements and judge that one of them must be false. When the price of gas was going up, the media and pundits were blaming the weak dollar (and Chinese demand, also). Now the price of gas is going down, and you claim it’s the weak dollar? That’s right up there with my Republican friends who breathlessly inform me of the statements of Obama’s religious leader, REV. Wright, and then a few months later come up to me and tell me he’s a muslim. Excuse me? Didn’t you just tell me he was going to a Christian church?
Or my all-time favorite, Sadaam has WMD and we have to go in there and get them. Excuse me? If he has WMD, and we tell him we’re attacking his homeland to take him out, will he not at the very least use the WMD on our advancing troops? Is this not the very reason that we’ve never invaded a country that has WMD before, no matter how despicable they are? Oh, wait, Bush is going to go ahead and send our troops into this meatgrinder? Then he’s either 1) looking for an excuse to use nukes on Iraq (the threat of which wouldn’t deter a country that’s being invaded anyway — they got nothing to lose) or 2) he knows that Sadaam doesn’t have WMD in the first place. You don’t have to be Spock to use simple logic. (BTW, I’m open to a credible attack on this logic, since I think it’s flawless but I obviously think I’m smarter than most people. “Maybe the Bush administration had secret knowledge that caused them to invade” doesn’t count, since the people who postulate that can’t come up with a hypothetical fact that would justify sending our troops to certain doom.)