"Rant, if you must rant. Rage against these moronic Bush-voters, if you must rage. But for God's sake, get it out of your system, and fast. Cause it isn't gonna help the next democratic candidate if the democratic party gets typecast as a bunch of shrill, screaming maniacs, who think they know better than anyone else, and throw tantrums when they lose."
I've read several pieces of advice to Democrats along these lines, and I think they all miss a fundamental differences between commentators and politicians. There's plenty of screaming maniacs on the internet, but those Democrats actually running for office seeem to be following your advice already. Think of John Kerry, asked by a reporter about Bush's military record. Anyone on this comments thread could have come up with a blistering attack. Kerry just said he had served honorably. And when internet ranting did start to bleed through to the official campaign the link was shut down faster than you can say "Kos"._My_ advice to Democrats is to rant and rage and call people idiots as much as you like. It really can't hurt, unless you're a politician or closely associated with one.
"Read Adam Yoshida's ("We’ve got their teeth clutching the sidewalk and [our] boot above their head. Now’s the time to curb-stomp the bastards...That’s the future of the Democratic Party: providing Republicans with a number of cute (but not that bright) comfort women")."
Adam Yoshida is a Canadian. Probably not the best example to quote if you're worried about United States Republicans. I'd like to think he's not representative of us right-wing Commonwealth types either.
"The signs probably won't accomplish anything, but (here's the important part) they'll do no harm."
Except eyestrain, perhaps. I appreciate the need for colour, but is yellow-on-blue really the best choice? I recommend black on warning-sign orange instead.
"It’s also notable that Bush is now well advanced into rhetorically conflating people who fly airliners into skyscrapers with people who take up arms against a military occupation of their country."
Well, when they "take up arms" against local policemen, UN workers, and preschoolers, that doesn't sound much of a stretch.
"The West does have a permanent welfare state, people who live in comfort and have done nothing to earn their comfort. These are the people who inherited wealth from their parents. You want to see parasites who are living off the sweat of decent, hard-working people’s brows? You might find some in the local Welfare office, but you’ll get a better view if you download the Paris Hilton video."
The difference is that the decent, hard-working people Paris Hilton is living off are her own relations. And that's really their business, isn't it? Actually the latest Analog has a solution to that "problem": read Steven Bratman's _Deletion_.
An Antipodean perspective: I was amazed and impressed to read that the woman actually has a job. We have exactly the same kind of poverty stories in the New Zealand media, but the protaganists never work. They sit around on some kind of benefit instead. Make of that what you will.
"They've been the guys who talk as if this Administration really is a threat to our future, not just as a piece of speechmaking boilerplate, but rather a threat to the basic quality of your life just a few years from now."
The trouble is that even if this is true, most Americans don't believe it. And trying to convince them of it will be difficult. What will be easier is just convincing people that Bush isn't the best person to be president, and they should vote for the other guy. No scary predictions needed, and the outcome is the same.
"And we won't see special 'Target: right-wing domestic terrorists with cynanide' logos and theme music on CNN and Fox News. And we won't see many speeches by pundits talking about how these people only respect force, and we neded to deal with them harshly, for once and for all, lest THEY KILL US IN OUR BEDS RIGHT NOW WITH SMOKING GUN MUSHROOM CLOUDS...."
If right-wing domestic terrorists had killed 2500 people, I'm sure you'd see exactly that. Not that that would necessarily be a good thing.
Don't let the .nz fool you with Gareth Wilson. Political troll from darkest Usenet, likes sniping and fleeing.
Thanks for the publicity, Carlos, but PNH and I have corresponded on darkest Usenet before. So he can judge my trollishness for himself.
As to my post, sorry for the error - I was working from memory and could have sworn he got six figures. As you say, he received $37,500 for four days work on "an advisory panel that had no function that I was aware of".
"They have poor corporate governance: you can't trust business accounting, and insiders often enrich themselves at stockholders' expense."
And the very people yelling loudest about crooked companies turn out to have pocketed six-figure consultancy fees from them.
Oh, wait...
| Year | Number of comments posted |
|---|---|
| 2005 | 1 |
| 2004 | 7 |
| 2003 | 3 |
Total: 11 comments. View all these comments on a single page.
The most recent 20 comments posted to Electrolite by Gareth Wilson:
Show all comments by Gareth Wilson.