Don't forget to VOTE!!

Napoleon

Registered
Joined
May 5, 2008
Messages
3,156
Likes
1,550
OK, if your are eligible to vote in the USA, it's too late to vote absentee, but you can still pester your friends to vote. So...

Don't forget to remind everyone you know in Yanquilandia to get out and vote today. And suggest they vote against "Fear" if at all possible.

A few signs from the Keep Fear Alive/Restore Sanity march this past weekend:

66308_1566261388816_1003837399_31584596_2867990_n.jpg


relax.jpg


73409_456257968878_735193878_5334112_5380288_n.jpg


And many many more: http://www.funnyordie.com/stories/4...-from-the-rally-to-restore-sanity-and-or-fear

So don't forget to remind your friends to vote. (I already voted and I'm about 54% sure that my vote will be counted.)

-Napoleon
 
I just voted. The choice was simple. On the Republican side, a real man -- Tom Emmer -- a huntin', drinkin', swearing' sort of fellow who's going to cut taxes to encourage enterpreneurship and thus increase jobs; on the other a namby-pamby bleeding-heart liberal -- Mark Dayton -- who wants to tax us out of existence (I'm not fooled by the rhetoric of "taxing the rich").
 
bigbadwolf said:
I just voted. The choice was simple. On the Republican side, a real man -- Tom Emmer -- a huntin', drinkin', swearing' sort of fellow who's going to cut taxes to encourage enterpreneurship and thus increase jobs; on the other a namby-pamby bleeding-heart liberal -- Mark Dayton -- who wants to tax us out of existence (I'm not fooled by the rhetoric of "taxing the rich").
I'm guessing that this sign:

enhanced-buzz-3243-1288470705-2.jpg


doesn't speak to you. :D

Well, I have a high school friend who is running for re-election as a judge. I think that he's a namby-pamby bleeding-heart liberal who is probably as crooked as the day is long. He's 6'10", but I'm sure he's soft on crime. And lately I've become convinced that the occasional rumors from various people back home that say he is gay are true!!

So I voted for him early and I've been trying to drum up as much support for him as possible. If any state needs a 6'10" namby-pamby bleeding-heart liberal judge who is possibly gay, it's Texas.

Don't forget to vote!
 
I was more influenced by this:

Steven Hill's new book "Europe's Promise: Why the European Way Is the Best Hope in an Insecure Age" has a message we should find very encouraging. The European Union (EU) is the world's largest and most competitive economy, and most of those living in it are wealthier, healthier, and happier than most Americans. Europeans work shorter hours, have a greater say in how their employers behave, receive lengthy paid vacations and paid parental leave, can rely on guaranteed paid pensions, have free or extremely inexpensive comprehensive and preventative healthcare, enjoy free or extremely inexpensive educations from preschool through college, impose only half the per-capita environmental damage of Americans, endure a fraction of the violence found in the United States, imprison a fraction of the prisoners locked up here, and benefit from democratic representation, engagement, and civil liberties unimagined in the land where we're teased that the world hates us for our rather mediocre "freedoms." Europe even offers a model foreign policy, bringing neighboring nations toward democracy by holding out the prospect of EU membership, while we drive other nations away from good governance at great expense of blood and treasure.

Of course, this would all be good news, if not for the extreme and horrible danger of higher taxes! Working less and living longer with less illness, a cleaner environment, a better education, more cultural enjoyments, paid vacations, and governments that respond better to the public — that all sounds nice, but the reality involves the ultimate evil of higher taxes! Or does it?

As Hill points out, Europeans do pay higher income taxes, but they generally pay lower state, local, property, and social security taxes. They also pay those higher income taxes out of a larger paycheck. And what Europeans keep in earned income they do not have to spend on healthcare or college or job training or numerous other expenses that are hardly optional but that we seem intent on celebrating our privilege to pay for individually.

If we pay roughly as much as Europeans in taxes, why do we additionally have to pay for everything we need on our own? Why don't our taxes pay for our needs? The primary reason is that so much of our tax money goes to wars and the military.

We also funnel it to the wealthiest among us through corporate tax breaks and bailouts.

"A few years ago, an American acquaintance of mine who lives in Sweden told me that he and his Swedish wife were in New York City and, quite by chance, ended up sharing a limousine to the theatre district with then-U.S. Senator John Breaux from Louisiana and his wife. Breaux, a conservative, anti-tax Democrat, asked my acquaintance about Sweden and swaggeringly commented about 'all those taxes the Swedes pay,' to which this American replied, 'The problem with Americans and their taxes is that we get nothing for them.' He then went on to tell Breaux about the comprehensive level of services and benefits that Swedes receive in return for their taxes. 'If Americans knew what Swedes receive for their taxes, we would probably riot,' he told the senator. The rest of the ride to the theater district was unsurprisingly quiet."
 
bigbadwolf said:
I just voted. The choice was simple. On the Republican side, a real man -- Tom Emmer -- a huntin', drinkin', swearing' sort of fellow who's going to cut taxes to encourage enterpreneurship and thus increase jobs; on the other a namby-pamby bleeding-heart liberal -- Mark Dayton -- who wants to tax us out of existence (I'm not fooled by the rhetoric of "taxing the rich").
Surely, you are being facetious. Please say you are.
 
darmanad said:
Surely, you are being facetious. Please say you are.

If he lives in Argentina, there's about a 90% chance that he was being facetious. (Sp aside)

Still, the retardation of my state (Texas) is mind blowing.

I'm off to hit on young women. I can only hope that sane Americans voted this year.

besos
 
darmanad said:
Surely, you are being facetious. Please say you are.

It destroys all the fun if I have to explicitly say it out loud. I did vote but my vote was really against the loud and obnoxious turnip-head the Republicans fielded. In principle I'm against lending a corrupt and morally bankrupt system any legitimacy by my participation. As I keep saying, the deployment of a carrier taskforce in the Persian Gulf is not going to be affected by a bunch of little old ladies filling out their ballots. As Emma Goldman said a century back, if voting could change anything they'd have abolished the ballot box a long time ago.
 
Something for that worthless s.o.b. Obama and the worthless b*stard corrupt Democrats to read:

The electoral debacle is a devastating indictment of the Obama administration and the Democratic Party. Two years after an overwhelming victory in the presidential election, four years after the Republicans lost control of both the House and the Senate, the right-wing policies of the Democrats have created the conditions for a massive comeback by the Republicans.


The corporate-controlled media and the representatives of the two big business parties are already proclaiming that the outcome of the election demonstrates that the American people have shifted to the right, embracing the “free market” nostrums of the Republican Party and the right-wing Tea Party movement.


This contention is both stupid and ludicrous. According to these political “experts,” in the midst of the worst economic crisis since the Great Depression, with unemployment near double-digit levels, millions facing foreclosure, and the poverty rate skyrocketing, the American people have decided that they favor eliminating unemployment compensation, cutting Social Security, closing public schools and slashing taxes for the rich.


Exit polls demonstrate that, far from a surge of popular support for the Republicans, the outcome was determined by a collapse in the vote among those who voted most heavily for Obama and the Democrats in 2006 and 2008. While young voters, those 18 to 29, comprised 18 percent of the vote in 2008, they made up only 10 percent of those who turned out at the polls on Tuesday. Those over 65 comprised 15 percent of the vote in 2008, but 24 percent of the vote in 2010.


The elderly shifted sharply against the Democratic Party in large measure because of the reactionary character of the Obama health care “reform.” Far from being a progressive measure to extend health care to the uninsured, the Obama plan was primarily a cost-cutting measure that many of the elderly regarded, quite correctly, as a threat to Medicare benefits. While 48 percent of the elderly voted Republican in 2008, this figure jumped to 58 percent in 2010, one of the largest swings among any demographic group.

Tuesday’s electoral rout will be bemoaned by Obama’s liberal apologists, from the editorial board of the New York Times to the Nation, who will join in blaming the American people for having “moved to the right.” In reality, the election has exposed the Democratic Party for what it is: an alliance of a part of the financial aristocracy with a privileged and complacent section of the upper middle class, a social category that includes the trade union bureaucracy.


Establishment liberalism is concerned about lifestyle issues and identity politics, but is utterly distant from the needs of the working people who are the vast majority of the population. It has moved so far to the right that the economic program of Obama and that of the incoming House Speaker John Boehner and the Republicans differs only on minor details.

Apologies to all and sundry for the lengthy quote, with the plea that it's not my wont.
 
bigbadwolf said:
... In principle I'm against lending a corrupt and morally bankrupt system any legitimacy by my participation. As I keep saying, the deployment of a carrier taskforce in the Persian Gulf is not going to be affected by a bunch of little old ladies filling out their ballots. As Emma Goldman said a century back, if voting could change anything they'd have abolished the ballot box a long time ago.

bigbadwolf said:
Something for that worthless s.o.b. Obama and the worthless b*stard corrupt Democrats to read:
Exit polls demonstrate that, far from a surge of popular support for the Republicans, the outcome was determined by a collapse in the vote among those who voted most heavily for Obama and the Democrats in 2006 and 2008. While young voters, those 18 to 29, comprised 18 percent of the vote in 2008, they made up only 10 percent of those who turned out at the polls on Tuesday. Those over 65 comprised 15 percent of the vote in 2008, but 24 percent of the vote in 2010.

You and all others of like mind would do well to continue to violate your prinicples by participating in the voting process. It's seriously flawed, especially after the recent Sup Ct decision further opening the corporate war chests, but in view of he piece you quoted from, it would seem voting does matter. I am not prepared to concede that who holds office is irrelevant.
 
Back
Top