
moar funny pictures
A more accurate description, consistent with both the contrapasso of the tongue-like flames and the Ulysses episode in Inferno 26 as well as with Guido's appearance in Inferno 27, might be the use of rhetoric--understood as eloquence* aimed at persuasion--by talented individuals for insidious ends. Rhetoric, according to a classical tradition familiar to Dante, is essential for civilized life when used wisely. However, eloquence without wisdom--far worse even than wisdom without eloquence*--is an evil that can "corrupt cities and undermine the lives of men" (Cicero, De inventione 1.2.3).
If the Dittoheads are engaging in voter fraud, then Evil Counselor and Sower of Discord Rush Limbaugh is engaging in suborning voter fraud. Republicans everywhere should be so proud of their little boy.On Thursday, March 20, the Cleveland Plain Dealer reported that the "Cuyahoga County Board of Election has launched an investigation that could lead to criminal charges against voters who maliciously switched parties for the March 4 presidential primary." According to the report, "One voter scribbled the following addendum to his pledge as a new Democrat: "For one day only."
"Such an admission amounts to voter fraud," the report continued, attributing that conclusion to BOE member Sandy McNair, a Democrat. The report said the four-member board - two Democrats and two Republicans - had yet to vote on whether it would issue subpoenas, although Ohio's secretary of state, Democrat Jennifer Brunner, is empowered to cast tie-breaking votes when the BOE is deadlocked.
...Michael Slater of Project Vote, a nonpartisan group that designs voter registration drives for low-income people, said GOP meddling in the Ohio Democratic Primary was a clear-cut example of fraudulent voting, which is how Republicans have defined the issue in recent years, as GOP advocates have urged state legislatures and Congress to adopt anti-fraud measures such as tougher voter ID laws.
"Here we have a real instance of spurring people on to engage in illegal election activities with a real intent to affect the outcome," Slater said. "That is voter fraud. People were encouraged to break the law. They had to declare allegiance to a political party and sign a document under penalty of perjury. Intent is what matters in voter fraud."
"Don't tell me words don't matter! 'I have a dream.' Just words. 'We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal.' Just words. 'We have nothing to fear but fear itself.' Just words, just speeches!""God damn America!" Just words?
"Life is full of little disappointments."It sounds pseudo-philosophical (and most of its appearances on the Internet are, in fact, pseudo-philosophical), but it was intended sarcastically - and I'm pretty sure it was intended sarcastically the first time I heard it. But where? It sounds like it could have come out of the mouth of a villain - or a super-villain - but which one? Casanova Frankenstein in Mystery Men? Jack Nicholson's Joker in Tim Burton's Batman? The arch-nemesis in the old Dungeons & Dragons-inspired TV show Wizards and Warriors?
Political Vocabulary Words
for Research and Reflection:
demagogue
platitude
cult of personality
Pyrrhic victory
And winning the nomination will not mean that the fight is over. No, events have taken an uglier turn than that. Hillary Clinton is attacking Barack Obama on his qualifications; Barack Obama is attacking Hillary Clinton on her character. The attacks are working, and voters are becoming disenchanted with both candidates.
There is a new sort of madness taking root. I have heard it from both sides of this internecine conflict, though more often, and more vehemently, from one side than the other. People have become so enamored with and dedicated to one or the other of the candidates that they are saying "If (Clinton)/(Obama) wins, I'm voting for McCain. Or I'm not voting at all!"
So what is is this? Stupidity? Insanity? Immaturity? Ignorance? Embracing the cult of personality so strongly that the person matters more than what they stand for? Maybe a "Well, if we're not gonna play the game my way, I'm gonna take my bat and my ball and go home" mentality? (For a fairly intense and well-referenced discussion on this topic, see this entry on Adam Felber's Fanatical Apathy.)
I suspect the shrivelled claw of Karl Rove in this, but that may just be a touch of paranoia.* But there's a very real chance that these threats may be more than just threats - that Democrats will once again find a way to snatch defeat out of the jaws of victory and once again let the Republicans take the White House**, and maybe Congress in the bargain.
There's a hell of a lot at stake in this election. There was a hell of a lot at stake in the last two elections, but many people didn't see that as sufficient reason to vote for the Democrat- and look where two Bush administrations have brought us. Are you better off than you were eight years ago? Did this country run better with a Republican President and a Republican-controlled Congress?***
I will vote for the Democratic candidate, whomever that candidate may be. I will vote for the Democrat because I know that whichever candidate gets sworn in next January, they will not simply lead us further along the path that George W. Bush has sent us down. I will vote for the Democrat because I have listened to what both candidates have been saying, and I like them both. I wish I could vote for them both. And maybe, if one or the other is willing to swallow their pride and sign on as the other's running mate, maybe I will.
Both sides need to stop playing the politics of personal destruction that have long been the hallmarks of their ignoble opponents. Hillary Clinton and her people need to stop undermining Barack Obama, creating an argument that Obama is inferior to McCain. And Barack Obama and his people need to stop demonizing Hillary Clinton, need to stop making her out to be some sort of monster that she isn't.
And both Clinton and Obama need to rally their forces to pledge to give their support to the other candidate, when the time comes that one or the other of them is no longer in the running for the Presidency. If the people threatening to vote for McCain or not vote at all will not listen to either reason, moral suasion, or impassioned appeals to emotion, maybe they will listen to their chosen candidate.
This is too important to lose. Again. Eight years of a Republican at the helm steering the Ship of State into the rocks is long enough.
Be friends, you English fools, be friends: we have French quarrels enow, if you could tell how to reckon. - Henry V, Act 4, Scene 1
*That's the wonderful thing about being an evil genius: you can be in a million places at once, because people will suspect you of involvement in anything that bears any resemblance to anything you have ever done before. For all I know, Rove may be in the Marianas Islands with Jack Abramoff and Tom DeLay, enjoying the company of underage laborers who have been forced into prostitution to pay for the abortions they were forced to undergo by their sweatshop bosses. Or he might just be lounging around in his underwear, watching his collection of Girls Gone Wild videos. Who can say?
**I have a confession to make: Unlike many members of his own party, I do not hate John McCain. I think he is a man of honor and principles, though I believe his principles have often been compromised on behalf of political necessity in the past - and will be again in the future, regardless of the outcome of this election. But I believe he is the wrong person to put in the White House next January. And, for all his qualifications and experience, Republicans felt he was the wrong person to put in the White House in previous elections. They determined he was less qualified than George W. Bush to be President in 2000 or 2004. Do we really want someone in office who has been determined by his own party to be inferior to the guy who has brought this country to where it is today?
***Oh, it ran smoother, I'll grant you that, when the Republican Congress only had to churn out legislation for their beloved leader to rubber-stamp, and could easily ignore any dissent from the Democrats in Congress. Why, you would never see this nonsense about FISA courts and concerns about "privacy" if the Republicans still held Congress!
Back on February 18 Whim passed this award along to me. It's very cool to know that I have made someone's day! I'm supposed to pass this award along to ten people, but I've been so slow to even accept it, you can count on me to be at least as slow to pass it on.
Today Whim informed me that she had presented me with this award. (The symbol means "heart" or "love" in l33tspeak.) (I had a longish bit here, but it wound up getting reduced to <3>. Now I can't remember what I wrote. But thank you, whim!)
I have to admit that I don't really "get" what awards are all about. When I first saw awards floating around the blogosphere, they were being presented by groups or organizations (or individuals posing as groups or organizations) and were often presented after a competition or a voting process. But now it seems that lots of people are making up awards and passing them around...which is totally, totally cool. I may actually do some myself. I have one in mind that would be awarded to a single person, and could be awarded by anyone to anyone at any time. But that may take time to cook up.
In the meantime I have another award that has no button: the "Blogs Worth Reading" award. That goes to all the blogs listed along my right-hand sidebar, which are there not because of some reciprocal-link agreement or anything like that, but because these are all blogs that I read, and I wanted a convenient way of getting to them. If I read them, they're worth reading.
And now the song:
The point where the line wrapped around itself. There were over 3500 people ahead of me.
Free Enterprise thrived along the line. Button vendors and T-shirt hawkers sold their ware up and down the line to a captive audience eager to buy.
A lone Republican crying out in the wilderness. He's opposed to Universal Health Care, apparently. Stupid babies and old people, why should they get a break?
The Obamanites, a small but vocal group of Obama supporters who chose not to join the other pro-Obama individuals who were going in to hear what Hillary had to say. Barack Obama has not yet announced any plans to visit Northeastern Pennsylvania.
Six o'clock came and went and we were still well outside of the gym - closer, but outside. We were all very cold, and as the sun set behind Scranton High School I noted that we were all about to get a lot colder.
And hear it we did. The audio was lousy, the introductions droned on, and no one outside the auditorium could see or hear us. But that didn't stop the crowd from cheering or clapping at appropriate times. One of the most popular items in both Hillary and Chelsea's speeches was a vow to end "the Unfunded Mandate known as 'No Child Left Behind'," one of the most far-reaching of the Bush Administration's many failures.
People eased out of their seats throughout the speech, which went on for a good while. Hillary opened with a good 10 minutes of local name-dropping ("I remember going to Tunkhannock for ice cream at the Shadowbrook! I just had white pizza in Old Forge!"), but in her case it was legit - she does in fact have family ties to this area (her father is buried in Scranton) and did in fact spend portions of her childhood here. Then she launched into a stump speech that was fairly light on specifics, save for a pledge to begin withdrawing U.S. troops from Iraq within 60 days of taking office. But for the most part, it was just cheerleading to an enthusiastic crowd - two crowds, if you counted us in the auditorium.
Towards the end of the speech, after many people had left, a teenage boy in a crumpled gray suit slipped onstage, made a pressing-down ("stay here") motion with his hands, and said something that only people at the front right of the audience could hear. One of them turned and shouted to the murmuring throng. "Stay here!" she yelled. "She's coming! Hillary's coming here!"
Suddenly the auditorium was alive again as people swarmed to fill the positions toward the front. The speech ended, and we waited.
And waited.
People came and went onstage. A microphone was set up. Several people who appeared to be aides, and probably not local - nobody wears long, dangly scarves around here - appeared onstage and seemed to take in the crowd. Several people entered the auditorium from the back and set up a "velvet rope" to define a do-not-cross zone.
At one point the boy in the gray suit peeked around the curtain, and the audience burst into applause and cheers. This became a running joke: every time he appeared the crowd erupted in cheers. Finally he walked across the stage and removed the microphone, stand and all. Huh?
And suddenly, she was there. Hillary Clinton herself.
She didn't have to do this, of course. She had just spoken to a screaming, enthusiastic crowd of 3500 in the gym, and we had heard her. What did she have to gain by spending some extra time with a few hundred folks who weren't able to get in to the main show?
But she did. She spoke to us, just us, for a good ten minutes. That impressed me. Then she came down off the stage and into the crowd - I think she was on the other side of the rope - and shook hands and met with people for another good long while.
I found her surprisingly charismatic. While neither as eloquent nor as charming as her daughter, she was still much more pleasant than the monster she is being made out to be by her opponent's fervent followers. And she did stir up quite a bit of enthusiasm in the crowd, quite the opposite of the effect that I am hearing being described in other sources.
Finally it was over and the crowd dispersed. Everyone left and cheerfully trudged to their cars, glad to have seen Hillary Clinton in her first official campaign stop in Pennsylvania.
And yesterday I saw Chelsea. (Call me, kiddo.)
Now I'm looking forward to seeing Barack Obama. If he ever decides to visit Northeastern Pennsylvania.
"We've all heard that a million monkeys banging on a million typewriters will eventually reproduce the entire works of Shakespeare. Now, thanks to the Internet, we know this is not true."
- Robert Wilensky