Leave me a little smackeral of something, won't you?
Go ahead, tell me what you REALLY think:
MOTH left a message on 2004-07-27 22:40:40
Politically, one of the best things about you since we've met is that you have learned to listen to issues and not the people who say "If you do nothing else before the election read blah blah blah by blah blah". You make up your own mind from your own observations. Good girl. I, Like you, am thouroughly SICK of the hatred. People stopping me on the streets of chicago and asking if I "want to help get Bush out of office". Not "can we talk about a candidate that I support?" Sheese guys. Even if the worst happened and kerry were elected, I doubt if he could do MUCH damage before the voters wised up and kicked his waffling ass out of our whitehouse in four years. But I'm not going to say who I support either. (Not MUCH I'm not)
---------------------------------------------------
cosmicrayola left a message on 2004-07-28 06:29:15
I have been swamped with emails from friends on both sides. One woman I work with is a laugh. Her famous two lines are, "I heard it on XXXX news station and they NEVER lie." And "My husband says, ......." But my favorite line was said long ago. "Believe none of what you hear and only half of what you see." Yup, call me jaded, but I don't think there is any politician in office or running that gives us the whole truth all the time. It's a crap shoot in the end.
---------------------------------------------------
l-empress left a message on 2004-07-28 08:51:25
The saddest part of all is that there is no longer any such thing as an unbiased journalist. They all have their own agendas, and it colors every "fact" they print. But what has caught my fancy recently is the following description of the Washington ego, politicians and reporters alike: politics is showbiz for ugly people.
---------------------------------------------------
jazz left a message on 2004-07-28 10:54:35
Wait - are you saying that if some terrorist incident interupted the voting, and only 1/4 of the country actually could physically cast a vote that we should accept that outcome? Nope, have to disagree there. The importance of our responsibility and privledge to vote is our universal access to it. The minute you limit access to vote, no matter HOW or WHY, I will whine about that - only it won't be whining - it will be asserting my rights, and my fellow citizens' rights to make their choice known.
---------------------------------------------------
Bill F. left a message on 2004-07-28 11:35:44
I think that if a massive terrorist attack happened and only 1/4 of the country would be able to vote by a week after the election that the outcome of the election would be, by far, the least of our problems. At their WORST, presuming they don't hijack 100 planes and smash them into every Nuclear power station in the US they'd be able to do that. I seriously doubt they'd succeed.
And again, if they did, who was president of the ruined and dying country would not be too important to me at that moment. I'd probably be dead. And if so, would want lots of company in hell to be joining me shortly.
---------------------------------------------------
Ibe left a message on 2004-07-28 11:46:54
Yes, jazz, that's what I'm saying. It would open up a very ugly door. At what point would the vote not be valid? If 75% couldn't access polling places? What about it 74.99999% could. Who makes the decision? Who makes the count? Do you want to open up a door to allow someone you MIGHT trust today to decide if and when an election should be held? And what if something OTHER than a terrorist attack interferes with the vote? What if 74.999% of the country were under some other thing, a massive power outage, a national outbreak of some desease...the problem is that in cracking that door open now it can swing wide open later. And believe me, it would.
---------------------------------------------------
jazz left a message on 2004-07-28 17:59:39
I see what you're saying, piglet. What I worry about is the open door of saying it's ok to prevent other folks from voting. That's an open door that scares me more than the one you reference. Also: What if something happens at 9 a.m. ET? Does that mean that no one from the West coast or Mountain Time zone get to vote? And, there will have to be another election held, if not for President, then for local elected officials, either going to D.C. or their state houses, etc. So, we will have to trust someone, at least in other time zones perhaps, somewhere, to make alternate arrangements if need be.
---------------------------------------------------
Go ahead, tell me what you REALLY think:
MOTH left a message on 2004-07-27 22:40:40
Politically, one of the best things about you since we've met is that you have learned to listen to issues and not the people who say "If you do nothing else before the election read blah blah blah by blah blah". You make up your own mind from your own observations. Good girl. I, Like you, am thouroughly SICK of the hatred. People stopping me on the streets of chicago and asking if I "want to help get Bush out of office". Not "can we talk about a candidate that I support?" Sheese guys. Even if the worst happened and kerry were elected, I doubt if he could do MUCH damage before the voters wised up and kicked his waffling ass out of our whitehouse in four years. But I'm not going to say who I support either. (Not MUCH I'm not)
---------------------------------------------------
cosmicrayola left a message on 2004-07-28 06:29:15
I have been swamped with emails from friends on both sides. One woman I work with is a laugh. Her famous two lines are, "I heard it on XXXX news station and they NEVER lie." And "My husband says, ......." But my favorite line was said long ago. "Believe none of what you hear and only half of what you see." Yup, call me jaded, but I don't think there is any politician in office or running that gives us the whole truth all the time. It's a crap shoot in the end.
---------------------------------------------------
l-empress left a message on 2004-07-28 08:51:25
The saddest part of all is that there is no longer any such thing as an unbiased journalist. They all have their own agendas, and it colors every "fact" they print. But what has caught my fancy recently is the following description of the Washington ego, politicians and reporters alike: politics is showbiz for ugly people.
---------------------------------------------------
jazz left a message on 2004-07-28 10:54:35
Wait - are you saying that if some terrorist incident interupted the voting, and only 1/4 of the country actually could physically cast a vote that we should accept that outcome? Nope, have to disagree there. The importance of our responsibility and privledge to vote is our universal access to it. The minute you limit access to vote, no matter HOW or WHY, I will whine about that - only it won't be whining - it will be asserting my rights, and my fellow citizens' rights to make their choice known.
---------------------------------------------------
Bill F. left a message on 2004-07-28 11:35:44
I think that if a massive terrorist attack happened and only 1/4 of the country would be able to vote by a week after the election that the outcome of the election would be, by far, the least of our problems. At their WORST, presuming they don't hijack 100 planes and smash them into every Nuclear power station in the US they'd be able to do that. I seriously doubt they'd succeed.
And again, if they did, who was president of the ruined and dying country would not be too important to me at that moment. I'd probably be dead. And if so, would want lots of company in hell to be joining me shortly.
---------------------------------------------------
Ibe left a message on 2004-07-28 11:46:54
Yes, jazz, that's what I'm saying. It would open up a very ugly door. At what point would the vote not be valid? If 75% couldn't access polling places? What about it 74.99999% could. Who makes the decision? Who makes the count? Do you want to open up a door to allow someone you MIGHT trust today to decide if and when an election should be held? And what if something OTHER than a terrorist attack interferes with the vote? What if 74.999% of the country were under some other thing, a massive power outage, a national outbreak of some desease...the problem is that in cracking that door open now it can swing wide open later. And believe me, it would.
---------------------------------------------------
jazz left a message on 2004-07-28 17:59:39
I see what you're saying, piglet. What I worry about is the open door of saying it's ok to prevent other folks from voting. That's an open door that scares me more than the one you reference. Also: What if something happens at 9 a.m. ET? Does that mean that no one from the West coast or Mountain Time zone get to vote? And, there will have to be another election held, if not for President, then for local elected officials, either going to D.C. or their state houses, etc. So, we will have to trust someone, at least in other time zones perhaps, somewhere, to make alternate arrangements if need be.
---------------------------------------------------