As most of you know, I am a Republican. However, I have stumbled accross the following: The State of Texas, under the leadership of Governor George W. Bush, is ranked: 50th in spending for teachers' salaries 49th in spending on the environment 48th in per-capita funding for public health 47th in delivery of social services 42nd in child-support collections 41st in per-capita spending on public education and ... 5th in percentage of population living in poverty 1st in air and water pollution 1st in percentage of poor working parents without insurance 1st in percentage of children without health insurance 1st in executions (average 1 every 2 weeks for Bush's 5 years as Governor) Just think of what he could do for the country if he were president! Please forward this to every person of voting age. John R. Finnegan Jr., Ph.D. Professor and Associate Dean For Academic Affairs School of Public Health, University of Minnesota Now what the fuck am I supposed to do, 'cuz there is no way in hell I am voting for GORE!

nader!!!

I do not think I have any choice but to set (SIT?) this one out.

NADER!

you could sell out. http://voteauction.com

It would be so lame to sit it out. The Greens support placing the option "NONE OF THE ABOVE" on the ballot. I don't agree with everythign the greens say, but that one I really like. And if you have a problem with Bush for the reasons listed in the first post, then maybe you really should consider Nader. A lot of socially liberal Republicans who are horrified by Bush and Gore, and wouldn't touch Buchanan with a stick, are considering Nader. Or you can vote Hagelin (Natural Law). Sitting out on a vote is not an effective form of protest in this country, as there is no way to distinguish it statistically from those too apathetic to vote (Nader wants to make election days national holidays, btw, so everyone gets off work to vote and celebrate the democratic process. If that happened, sure, a lot would just go to the beach, but maybe a lot would vote who didn't have time before).

Not protest, per say. Try apathy. I am getting to the point to where I just don't care anymore

Your first post didn't sound apathetic.

This apathy is just a momentary condition, it will pass soon

Thats silly. If you value choice in elections to come, you will vote Nadar, or any other third party for the simple purpose of bringing them into the game. Nadar won't win, but if he gets enough votes, his party will get tax payer funds in the future like the repubs and democrats do. If you value choice, and are tired of having to choose between dumb and dumber then you will help diversify our popularity contest of an election system.

I don't care at all about apathy...

I don't care much for you either, M.

as a texas citizen, i've had the opportunity to vote against dubya, directly or indirectly, on several occasions. as a result, i have lost weight, my cholesterol is lower, and my sexual dysfunction is a thing of the past. after the forthcoming presidential election, i may be able to walk again. shrubbery dot com.

NADER!

Jello Biafra for President!

Ok when you vote None of the Above on your ballot it gives you the oppertunity to choose a canidate of your own... Choose Kermit The Frog... Maybe if we all choose Kermit he will be the President... And think of all the fun we'll have.

I read an article on "None of the Above" and what happens is that they run another election with different candidates. So in order to vacate the office completely, you'd need 125 million elections. The non-vote, on the other hand, is a vote of solidarity with those of us who don't think a power index of one in several million is sufficient compensation for the years we spent locked in government schools, the years afterwards in which a quarter to a third of everything we makes goes back to that government, and all the privacy we lose whenever the "intelligence" community gets a boost in funding. The next time somebody has a worthwhile plan for the elimination of government from our society, they're not going to look to the major parties for support, they're not going to even look to the green party or reform party or new party. Anyone who votes for these parties, or indeed who votes at all, recognizes government as a valid concept. When Nader gets n votes, gore or dubya, whoever wins, will look at those votes as people who support the current system, who can be won over with a change in ideology or rhetoric. So there will be a boost in funding to the EPA or whatever, some mention of environmental issues in the next state of the union address, and before you know it, Nader's platform has been swallowed and only the most informed voters will recognize the hollowness of the president's actions come next election. Will my vote be counted as apathetic? Yes. Will it change anything? No. You must realize that the government isn't dumb enough to set up a means of dismantling itself. They have nothing to fear on election day, the people are guaranteed to vote in more government, and with the help of mass media, the government they vote in will be substantially the same as the present one. Voting won't work, violence won't work, dressing up in black and listening to punk rock won't work. To date, nothing that will work has been found, but I suppose there's always hope.

i have a friend, whose brother is in the Secret Service, apparently, the branch of the government that gets the most money, but so little is known is FEMA (Federal Emergency Management ?????)....apparently, should China start lobbing nukes this way, or something catastrophic like that FEMA takes over, the Constitution is suspended, factories and utlities are government owned, banks are closed, civil liberties put on hold. The president goes toa bunker ands sits quietly until the generals destroy the enemy, and who knows if what would be restored.

Dismantle the government, and who's left to run the show? Corporations. At least there is a small measure of public acontability in government... As far as FEMA goes, martial law is martial law,no matter what name you give.

The New Yorker had a great article a while ago about a bunker from the Cold War that's been opened to the public, finally. It sounds really cool. Enough stuff to survive for like two years, and special government people got to go there. In North Carolina, I think. But don't quote me. Help?

who says violence won't work? I'm all for a violent revolution. I just don't know who to hit. Damn.

Isolde that bunker is in WVA, i saw as story on that place.

Um, OK, corporations haven't dropped any nuclear bombs on cities. That was a government. Corporations didn't steal the country from the natives. Again, the government. Corporations didn't kill Sacco and Vanzetti (sp?), corporations didn't keep blacks and women disenfranchised, corporations don't restrict your ability to send encrypted e-mail, corporations don't take your money without asking. What power do corporations have? The only way a corporation can get money without a willing exchange of goods and services is when they strike a deal with a government (re: microsoft in malaysia (or some other country)). The only way a corporations grow rich is if the people are rich enough to buy their products. And the only way a significant number of people become rich is by being free. Talk about public accountability, if nobody buys win2k, microsoft loses out, fires people, hires other people, and the next one will be somewhat better. Whereas if nobody likes bush or gore, they still (mostly) vote for the lesser of the two evils and the country remains in essentially the same hands. The new anti-corporatism is the same as anti-communism was back in the day, an excuse for a massive government power-grab that is worse than the problem in the first place. I'm not saying corporations are harmless, but they're certainly not as bad as government. Oh, and Antithesis: When your group has less than 2% of the population and uses violence against the current system, you are a "terrorist." Maybe if you had 70% and you won, you'd be a "revolutionary," but as it stands, violence is the quickest way to bring the full force of the national guard down on you, and you're simply not going to beat them. There are reasons against violence when you do stand a chance in hell, but I won't get into those now.

Wow, Tired, are you tired now? That was a lot. You are, however correct. But, I do see more and more people agree with Antithesis. And just what the hell can we do anyway? We really do not live in a democracy any more. And the last two presidential elections were_not_won by popular vote, they were won by electoral colleges.

Well met, Tired. Well met. Thanks, Patrick. I couldn't remember the details very well. I just cleaned my house. It is very clean all of a sudden, in addition to being naked because I've shipped a bunch of stuff.

Tired: never figured you for a corporate apologist. Ever here of corporate violence against unions? Hmmm? Pullman strike? Ever hear of economic reasons behind warfare? Ever hear of a concept called "the glass ceiling"? Ever hear of Love Canal, DDT? When the government doesn't restrict corporate polluters, whose wellbeing do they have in mind, the public's? Or the corporations? Ever think about why all the big polluting companies flocked to Mexico after NAFTA/GATT? It wasn't to give all those poor people jobs that pay a living wage. It was to evade tougher environmental laws in the US. Ever read about recent cancer rates in populations around the maquilodoras? Oh, but it's "their" choice to work there, the corporations want everyone to be rich. That's why they pay so much money to their workers, right? So there should be a small gap between CEO and workers pays, of course. What? it's something like a 600% difference? Dum de dum, I didn't hear that. Jeez,and no one "has to buy Windows2K". Well, until recently, try getting a PC that didn't come with Windows already installed. If it wasn't for government regulation, monopolies would destroy the free market system. Anyone with a sense of history knows that you don't turn your bakc on big corporations, and only less so on the government. And your analogy between Gates/the elections stinks. Your argument for how the market supposedly keeps corporations accountable (try saying that with a straight face) is exactly the same as the argument why democracy is viable: You don't like it, make another choice. Contrary to what most people think, there are plenty of choices out there. Ever think?

semillama does have a small....point..... Do you think corporations have people killed that might get in their way? Sure they do. Did you realize that AT&T asked for Judge Green to imnpose the divestiture? Why? Because the way it was was costing AT&T too much money and needed to seperate themselves from the local service to increase profit margins. The oil industry is the worst. A small device that goes on your fuel line was invented 15 years ago that increased fuel economy by at least 10%, gauranteed. It did much better, but the manufacturer would only gaurantee 10%. Who owns it and the patent for it? Opec. Who runs this country? Corporations. Who runs the UN? Corporations. Why else would the US pass NAFTA which sends jobs out of the country? Because it is cheaper for coporations to hire somone in Mexico to stuff your Dodge Ram seats with (litteral) shit in the seats. Oh, not only is labor and materials cheeper, but also far less safety concerns. Allied Signal sent thier "Slurry Coaters" for catalyc converters to Mexico because there the employees do not have to where proctective gear when handling this toxic shit. There should be no question who runs the country, and soon, they WILL TAKE OVER WORLD! Move over Brain. Pinky, are you pondering what I am pondering? I think so Brain, but how are we going to get it to fit in such tiny holes?????

OK, I'm hungry now so this is going to be sorta rambling. . . I didn't say corporations were harmless. As for accountability, if 10% of the people buy Jones Cola instead of Pepsi, Jones Cola has 10% of the market. Whereas if 10% of the people vote Nader, nothing happens. Economic reasons behind warfare - OK, if there were no army, what's a company going to do? Go around convincing people to bring back government and start a huge military buildup? This is highly unstable and would take years and no matter how many weapons contract the company gets, it won't be cost effective. Yes, public goods are underproduced in a free market. If you have any solutions to this problem which do not involve giving a few hundred people control over several million guns and lots of nuclear bombs, I'd be happy to look it over. The current, imperfect solution is this: let the market progress, let the people become rich, and watch them grow more concerned with cleaning up the environment, feeding the hungry, etc. as there are fewer problems with saving up for retirement and feeding the kids. We had to go through a pretty "dirty" period of industrialization to get here, but the quicker the economy is allowed to grow, the shorter this period is, and soon mexicans (if they weren't hampered by a corrupt government) would want pay raises and safe working conditions. Re: turning one's back on corporations, I didn't suggest this. There are ways of keeping corporations in line without elevating a few jerks to positions of almost total authority. Unions, boycotts, whatever. If there's a clip of some company shooting a union leader on the news, they're never getting another penny of my money. It's not justice, how justice will be served (not perfectly, of course, but what we have now sure isn't perfect) in a society without government is a thorny issue. I try to avoid anything made in China. Intel stirs up the chip market by paying companies to develop new bloated inefficient apps that require their higher speeds, so they're shitlisted, too. Make your own shitlist, publicize it, there's power without guns. If you think companies should only hire fat lazy americans, by all means, buy exclusively from such companies. As for "Well, until recently, try getting a PC that didn't come with Windows already installed," Macs have been around forever, and if you wanted a third option, find a geek who will assemble your computer from parts and install redhat linux on it, which has also been around for a while. It's not as convenient as Best Buy or whatever, but that's part of what makes it cool. I mean, if all of your favorite indie bands had their CDs in Wal-Mart, wouldn't you be a little pissed? Now, corporations wanting everyone to be rich. Alright, granted, Ford isn't going to double the salary of all of its workers in order to generate new sales; obviously they aren't going to get back more than they put out. My point was that corporations do not benefit when people are kept poor. How much business would Nike do in a police state with breadlines? As for OPEC's patent, how about a new law: the government can nullify your patent if it will benefit the public as a whole, or if you are using it in an anticompetitive manner, or, in short, if they really want to. And if you say that this should only be applied to the "big corporations," just pass the law and watch the definition of "big" shrink. Where government power can be increased, government power will be increased. On one hand, OPEC has this patent. On the other hand, the government has all the patents. It's a big mess. I suggest that the thread degenerate into insults and innuendo right away, cos nobody here is going to change his/her mind.

First, a short reply to Trace regarding NAFTA: bugger off. I hate that reply "why should THEY get OUR jobs?!" whine. THEY */ARE/* US. If we fight until "they" get the same wages and benefits that "we" do, then there won't be an incentive to "give" "them" jobs. Right. Tired: "Um, OK, corporations haven't dropped any nuclear bombs on cities. That was a government." The corporations sure as hell didn't complain, especially the ones who knew they were going to get in on the ground floor "reconstructing" Japan's economy. "Corporations didn't steal the country from the natives. Again, the government." bullshit. Remember those mudslides that wiped out entire villages one or two years back in Central America? Mudslides caused by unchecked timber, and bad ecological decisions by big corporations looking for cheap labor and agricultural "strip-mining" leaving the soil weak and the ecosystem unsteady. "Corporations didn't kill Sacco and Vanzetti (sp?)" Sacco and Vanzetti wouldn't agree with you there. They were both union men. ref: Nicola Sacco's famous last letter to his son: Help the weak ones that cry for help, help the prosecuted and the victim, because they are your better friends, they are comrades that fight and fall as your father and Bartolo (Vanzetti) fought and fell yesterday for the conquest of the joy of freedom for all the *POOR WORKERS*... (emphasis mine) S and V are posterchildren for the anti-corporate types; they stood up against corporations, for unionized labor and fair labor practices, and they got railroaded and murdered for it. I'm obviously missing something in your argument if big corporations weren't responsible for their death, at least indirectly. "corporations didn't keep blacks and women disenfranchised" anybody want to get into an affirmative action fight? As far as I'm concerned, Quotas and the whole affirmative action movement only serves to show off, and thus keep real, the divide between "black" and "white." It's in the corporations best interest to have people who are desperate for work, and you can bet your ass that they know it. "corporations don't restrict your ability to send encrypted e-mail, corporations don't take your money without asking." double bullshit with sugar on top. Email: shitty software, pre-released, to beat the competition and make a buck, on one hand. On the other hand, companies making great software to spy on us in hopes of winning fat defense department contracts; corporations that want to know all of our personal data, from shopping tendencies to shoe size. Corporations don't take our money without asking? Take a look at all the false advertising in the world. You want a toothbrush? $1.00. ring it up; and it's $5.50 after adding bristles. Oil companies with prices jacked up 500%. unprosecutable trusts creating price floors way above the market norm. I know I shouldn't pay this much, but I don't have a choice. Of course, corporations have to work through channels, channels that usually consist of lobbying, or other methods of buying votes and politicians, but it's the corporations behind it. I know this is all rhetoric right now, but I'm on my lunch break. I'll do the research this weekend? "Talk about public accountability, if nobody buys win2k, microsoft loses out, fires people, hires other people, and the next one will be somewhat better." If no one ELSE buys win2k, then people suddenly have a harder time working together, we all lose money, especially as new bugs and exploits are found daily in win98 (not that 2k will be any better), MS rolls out some sort of vaporware to make back some lost income, jacks the prices on other services by a bit, sits back and laughs as we flounder in our sudden incompatibility until they roll out Windows Ultrasupercool, or whatever; they put more money into fighting the other OSs, develop a shitty version of linux that promises compatibility with the MS products we all already own, and charges for it; buy even MORE stock in Apple, and laughs maniacally. "Oh, and Antithesis: When your group has less than 2% of the population and uses violence against the current system, you are a "terrorist." Maybe if you had 70% and you won, you'd be a "revolutionary," but as it stands, violence is the quickest way to bring the full force of the national guard down on you, and you're simply not going to beat them." The black bloc isn't dead yet. There are plenty of people who are commiting acts of violence against the government, daily. they just don't get any press. And I'm not really commiting myself to violent revolution, yet. I do think that this will all come down to a class war, eventually, though. My friend (the anarchist who was in jail for a month after the Republican Convention. He's out!! YEA!!! he was charged with assaulting an officer and resisting arrest, which is completely false, along with the criminal mischief, and conspiracy to commit that we already knew about. He has to go back in a month for trial. There was a hunger strike in the prison... the boy did nothing but eat for two days when he got out.) has a great poster on his wall "in case of emergency, remember the following targets" and then lists several corporate headquarters in SF.

"If there's a clip of some company shooting a union leader on the news, they're never getting another penny of my money." You think the giant corporations are going to show that on their channels? Their channels on our airwaves, I might add. How much of the protests did you see on the news outside the conventions recently? How much coverage of the protesters points of view did you hear (aside from Ralph Nader, who is on TV quite a lot - a sign not all is lost yet)? And the argument that corporations have an interest in everyone getting wealthier is BS. CEOs aren't willing to budge an inch on cutting their own salaries and it's become a sound business practice to downsize the work force to save money. But don't touch that Golden Parachute! Granted, some companies are starting to offer employees stock options, and even mandatory savings accounts. The power of public opinion is one thing I will agree with on -don't underestimate it. That's why you won't see a Republican president work seriously to end abortion. But in the end, it's going to have to be an involved public in government that brings about these changes. You can't just say "The power of the Free market will Prevail!" A totally unregulated market would be a disster for the entire planet. No pollution controls, no unions, and everyone making enough to scrape by, brainwashed into thinking they oughta have a brand new pair of Nikes. If 10% of the people were behind Nader, something would happen. $12 million in matching federal funds for tehGreen Party would happen in 2004. Imagine Nader with an advertising budget. Economic warfare? The words "Pinkerton Security Force" come to mind. Take a look at Africa if you want to see armies fighting for the interests of big companies,not their people. "soon mexicans (if they weren't hampered by a corrupt government) would want pay raises and safe working conditions." What are you on? Do you think they don't want them now? They don't need the magic of an unregulated economy, they need a government that will stand with them against corporations so greedy that they don't give two shits about the health problems their products cause. Sad truth is, corporations will do anything to skimp on human well being (be it wages or health, to make a buck, if they can get away with it. Look at Firestone and Venezuela. I don't think that companies shuold only hire fat, lasy americans, or even just speed freak americans. I just have the bad taste to think that companies should look out for their workers health and well being before they look after the massive profits they stuff in their own back pockets. That goes for Mexicans, Filipinos, Chinese, Indonesians, and even fat lazy americans. Even americans who piss about how this country holds back the economy and then discourages people from voting.

im just wondering if im goign to get nookie tonight, and further hoping the mrs. didn't spend all our money in Vegas last night.

inother news: WWF Invites Bush, Gore To Debate On Smackdown Posted By Stone9Cold on 8.30.00 In a press conferenence earlier today, the WWF invited both George W. Bush and Al Gore to have a public debate on an upcoming edition of Smackdown, with Jesse Ventura serving as the moderator. The WWF billed this the "Smackdown Challenge" and th candidates are welcome to have a 5 minute debate on any Smackdown in November. The WWF did get some publicity for this as C-Span carried the press conference. No word on the reactions of Al Gore and George W. Bush. Credit: Buck Woodward & 1wrestling.com

OK. Now I'm actually tired. It's good to see that everyone here has thought through their positions, unfortunately that means that they/you will feel more aligned with these positions than somebody who just grew up with them, and thus nobody's going to change his/her mind anyway. Speaking abstractly, this is how I view the situation. With anarchy, everyone protect him/herself. So let's say everyone has a gun. Now, there will be some bloodshed. But the purported solution, government, means that a small group of people is in charge of a vast number of guns. Not only do the people who would be in charge of the bloodshed under anarchy still go free, some of them even end up in positions of vast authority. And since they are now "respectable public servants," everyone can use the gun-holders for their own gain. This means everyone from environmental lobbyists to the christian right to corporations. I think fewer of these groups would go to the government were the government held in the same contempt as the mob. And even fewer of them would form a government for their own purposes if the people understand that positions of power will always be abused. Now, onto specifics: Sacco and Vanzetti: the corporations didn't want the blood on their own hands, so they used the government, as explained above. Were it not for the government, they might have just hired hitmen, or maybe they would have decided to just hope the whole thing would blow over. Economic warfare: "Take a look at Africa if you want to see armies fighting for the interests of big companies,not their people." When have armies _ever_ fought for the interest of their people? Armies fight for the interest of the guy who tells them to fight. Nader - OK, great, so your vote gets you a tiny bit of attention. Whereas voting with your dollar for the 3rd most popular product actually gets you the 3rd most popular product, and forces the top 2 to examine your demographic. $12 million is nothing, Nader is not going to win, not this year, not in 2004. Mexicans do not need a government to protect them against greedy corporations. As more and more companies hire mexicans, the unemployed mexican will become a rarity, and soon even busing tables will pay $6/hr. But I haven't studied the structure of their economy or government, so "soon" is perhaps an overstatement. Corporate murder coverups. So the big corporations look out for one another, and all the major new outlets would pass up a chance at breaking the next OJ, DuPont, Bobbitt just to protect another fatcat? They all get together every friday and smoke big fat cigars and play poker and laugh at the plebes? As for the corporations wanting everybody to be wealthy, again, you miss my point. The CEO won't drop bags full of money out the window; he's not going to get it all back. But, if there's some way, that's free to him, of increasing the amount of money everyone has, of course he'll support it. More money means more people buying mousepads or whatever he's selling. Of course, chances of making everybody a lot richer don't come along very often, but if you're selling mousepads, you don't want a totalitarian state, cos that means that only Party members get computers, and they'll only be allowed one mousepad apiece. Capitalists are a unique species. They don't give a fuck. Now, you can just deal with that and get your benefits by threatening to leave for a company that offers benefits, you can split and join a hippie commune, or you can have the government go and take over the companies and manage them a lot worse and leave the benefits to the Party elite. So the black bloc commits acts of violence that don't get on the news. Hm. That's pretty sad. I mean, do they think they will slowly and violently chip away at the system until one day we wake up and the government is gone? OK, e-mail. PGP is out there. The corporations can't do a damn thing about it. Well, OK, you can't get it outside of the US unless you're willing to *gasp* break the law, but really, it's out there. Why don't you use it? "Well gee, PGP wasn't in the store. . ." dammit, you've got to learn to stand on your own two feet and think with your head. Don't buy software from stores. Hell, some of the best software doesn't need to be bought at all. And the leader in spying technology is the NSA, a government agency. I don't know if any company's corporate intelligence budget (and/or paranoia) would be big enough to support such a monstrosity. The corporations sure as hell didn't complain (about the bomb): It was world war friggin' two. One of the clearest cases of morally ambiguous versus evil in history. A tiny tiny percentage of the population was opposed. But do you really think that a corporation could have fought the entire war and run the manhattan project just to open up a few factories in Japan? Windows, compatibility. Oh shit, I can't read a fucking doc file. I guess I'll sue the bastards. An involved public in the government, bringing about changes: I'm seeing a hamster on a wheel in a cage here, folks. Go ahead and get the last word, everybody. Other people have said what I'm trying to say, only better. I can't keep spending this much time on this thread.

Fat, Lazy Americans???? Oh, don't pick on Mexicans, Italians, Russians, Africans, whoever the fuck else, because that is polically incorrect, but just sit there and mouth off and call us fat and lazy? I mean this, fuck you, you ass. Frankly, I am sick and tired of that bullshit. Fuck politcally correct, because, you know what? Polical Correctness is just not PC. I am so sick of whining jack asses that call us fat and lazy just because you are jealous. We work our asses off. Not saying that you don't, mind you, but I work my ass off to provide for my family and don't ask anyone for shit. I dont want a government hand out of any kind. No wellfare, no food stamps and no public health care. I want choices, and I want to be left the fuck alone. Anytime you allow a goverment to give you any kind of assistance, you give them the oppertunity to tell you what to do, where to go, who to see, and what the fuck to do with what they give you, because they have that right since they are supporting your ass. I realize that as an american I probably make a lot more than someone in a third world country, or an economically depressed country, but since when does that make me fat and lazy? I work hard for what I have, thank you very fucking much. I AM ACTUALLY OFFENDED. How about that? If I said that in a company, and I was not white or some "minority" then you all would be sued for "hurting my feelings" (isn't that what being offended and polical correctness all about, who hurt who's feelings?) Enough of that rant.. I am not sure if I am even going to post this..........

Sorry Trace, but the majority of us from first World countries are fat and lazy. Both literally and figuratively. We work less hours and eat more than 70% of the World. And then we (and I use that term to include myself) sit around and bitch about our governments, our taxes and anything else we can think of. Or worse still some people don't bitch, but just accept the status quo without ever questioning if there is a better way. In a third World country, you're too busy just trying to feed your family by any means possible. You don't have the luxury to pontificate endlessly about how things should be run and who should be in charge. And some of us don't even bother to vote. A freedom that people are dying for right now in places like East Timor. A year ago today exactly, the East Timorese risked their lives to vote for independence and they are still paying the price. I'm not saying we shouldn't be proud of what we accomplish in our lives. But an occasional thought of how lucky we are might keep some shit in perspective. Back to the bitching now...

True, Cat.

"As more and more companies hire mexicans, the unemployed mexican will become a rarity, and soon even busing tables will pay $6/hr. But I haven't studied the structure of their economy or government, so "soon" is perhaps an overstatement." If you haven't studied the structure of their economy or government, why are you making statements about it? You're right about not convincing each other, though. But you're still wrong about public democracy, even if you won't alter your paradigm to think about it. If the public voted in percentages coming even close to the percentage of registered voters, then you couldn't joke about accountability. But of course, you're an anarchist, so you have to dismiss all forms of government. Let's here it for worldwide anarchy! 6 billion anarchists! Do you honestly think that's going to be a better situation? Even if it was just here in America, with no limits on corporations and everyone with guns, htat's a pretty scary thought. You critize a social democracy, and fine, you have some valid points there. But you doon't see that you talk about a pure free market economy the smae way people like me talk about social democracies - in an idealized way. You assume that all the corporate bigwigs are going to want everyone making money, because that means everyone is going to be buying more of their products. Yeah, In an ideal world, that would be great. Capitalists would pay living wages, wouldn't pollute for fear of negative publicity, would look out for the communities where their workers lived and so on...I've heard it before. It doesn't work that way in the real world. Most corporations are too short-sighted to worry about if everyone is making enough money to buy their products. The focus is all on short term profits. Look at the auto industry. We have a technology that is absolutely dependent on petroleum products, a limited resource, yet instead of doing what makes sense and designing and marketing vehicles that have incredible gas mileages, thus extending the length of time before oil reserves run out, we see them lobbying against teh gas tax on SUVs and putting out monster gas hogs like the Excursion. Oh, sure, the public demands them, but you don't really see anyone who really thinks long term in an SUV. In fact, the closest thing to a government-free, free market society in America I've come across is the 19th century Copper Country in the Upper Peninsula of Michigan. The gov't there issued land permits, but law enforcement was a joke there until close to the turn of the century. All services were provided by the copper companies, who in turn used this as political muscle against their employees, giving housing to those who toed the company line, and those talked union, well, suddenly there wasn't a roof over their heads, no doctor available for their family, unless you wanted to hike 20 miles through the countryside. The culmination of the whole paternalistic system came in 1913, with the Italian Hall tragedy. Listen to Woody Guthrie's "1913 Massacre" to get an idea of it. whatever, I'm tired of yelling at a wall.

i trying to figure this out. I can't tell who is fighting who here. what are you people talking about and why? It seems everyone is lobbing half truths, with the occassional indisputable facts in betweem. Why don't you guys write a silly screen play (see the other thread i've polluted with my literary poop) with all this tappa tappa tappa you be doing on the the keys?

I'm just waiting for Margret to show up, actually. Trying to keep it simmering until then. I miss it when she just lays you low with her superior knowledge of how politics actually works.

Indeed, patrick. Actually, I was thinking about making a text-based adventure about me. I mean, fundamentally, anything an author writes is about the author, this would just be more blatantly self-centered. You are awake on a mattress on the floor.. It is 10:30 am, 2 and a half hours after the alarm first went off. The day is calm, sunny, and warm. You have 30 minutes until your first class, 20 minutes away. . . blah blah blah. south you are in the kitchen. look around. A typical bachelor's kitchen. A new toaster, a fridge is from the 70s, the sink from the 60s, and an oven from the 50s. Foodstuffs abound: milk, soy sauce, tortillas, ramen, cream cheese, cheerios, etc. A bong sits invitingly on the fridge. dot dot dot

I'm going back to the food thread.

hysterical. What was that one, Zork? I wasted a lot of time on that. Steve the Gothic Archaeologist and I were reminiscing about the arcade games of our youth yesterday, and we both agreed that the tops of list were Galaga, Xenophobe, and Gauntlet. Other ones that we had individual prefernces for included Tron, Tempest, and Ms. Pacman.

Gauntlet was cool. i was into that game Karnov. i remember playing the hell out of it the first time i ever ate mushrooms. the skateboard game 720, Rampage where you were like a big ass Godzilla and had to smash down buildings, Spyhunter, Elevator Action, Track and Field and the all time favorite, Tron. I loved Tron 2 where you jumped back and forth on the platforms while hurling discs at the other guy. ahhhh, the video arcade. I'm going to the mall afterwork.

Fuck O, Você Burro! Rampage - totally! And 720 even when I couldn't skate to save my life. I was totally hooked on Elevator Action for Intellivision, as well as the Dungeons and Dragons game. And of course, Zelda.

Pitfall, Tempest, Moon Patrol and yes 720 rocked..... there used to be an arcade in Raleigh, owned by the bass player of polvo it was nothing but vintage games. Blue Basson it was called, unfortunately they couldnt make ends meet.....damn.

and what about Space Invaders? i guess im older than you lot. Tron? fucking hell. before spave invaders it was BattleShip.

oh yeah, NADER. i wish. i want to vote for him, but a vote for him is a vote somewhat away from a vote, for someone else, who might save the chance or prevent it, from someone who might make the desiscion to keep my right from choosing if i can have a legal abortion or not. which basically means a safe one. sorry boys, i just have to think in this manner. hey if you were gay, and it had to do with your sexuality in some way, you would might in the future be really shocked to have to vote this way? what if Gore wanted to pass a law about circumsicion or not? im sure its the lowest sexuality(male)question on the agenda pole, but if it was a question, would you boys "rise" to the occasion and fight it out politically? think about what us females go through...

I'm actually thinking of voting for Nader. Someone pointed out to me that though the republicans say they are anti-choice they have never stopped abortions from being legal. I don't know. Har nut to crack. I can't imagine them really outlawing the stuff at this day and age, but you know I'd hate to have those illusions shattered. Afraid I'm optomistic just because I live in a city in the NorthEast.

And fer the record I do think that if a third party candidate got a significant vote that it influences the ability of third party candidates to run and win in future elections. I mean, there are now a handful of Reform Party folks who have gotten their way, not a lot but a few, and I think that is a great sign that gradually things are opening up. I will say that I do think everyone should vote and often. Especially if you are woman, if you've ever seen or read any info on the suffragettes I think it's really striking how women only about 100 years ago worked so hard and gave so much so that women today can vote. I won't say that the choices are great, but remember that women did have to work hard to be seen as people who could have a voice in how they are governed (you may now play the star spangled banner for dramatic effect). As for NAFTA, remember it's not just about low end jobs going to south America, my friend works in the hollywood 'model shop' and propmaking industry and since NAFTA all their work goes to Canada because they can pay skilled labor 65 cents to our dollar. NAFTA doesn't just benefit poor countries we've plundered as some kind of payback. Subsequently, he's become a liberatarian and a racist, I think because he feels disempowered. (OK and granted, like he should switch jobs but it's not his fault his industry dried up and went away)