City of Amnesia

Do it!

Icon and sig are appropriate, Money, as I heard that in his voice.

I did this morning~ Now, I spend the day watching the coverage and drinking. <3

I voted absentee already.

I voted absentee but they'll probably throw mine out. I just voted President and then wrote in superheroes for the other elections I don't know about.

I was eating cereal while I read this. Bad idea.

There are a lot of superheros who aren't native-born US citizens, so that's no good.

I am so mad I am seventeen, I really wanted to vote this year. :(

Well, I put secret identities, so nobody will know.

I tend to like Marvel guys more, but I really feel the black and white DC characters would do a better job leading the country. We don't need some angsty Marvel guy going nuts and starting another Civil War. I'm happy I made an informed choice. I actually thought about it a lot while I was filling it out. (I put down Green Arrow the most, in case you're wondering).

Too bad they're just going to toss it out... I'm just hoping that the minimum wage employee who reads it likes my attitude and gives me double votes... I heard that happens sometimes.

I voted early this morning as well. Voted for Nader like I always do, although I was thinking about voting for Bob Barr, but choose Nader instead.

SOMEONE SET US UP THE 'BAMA.

I am seriously crying tears of joy. This is amazing.

Well Congratulations to Obama for winning the election, but also we all won cause we got to see Chris "Thrill up my leg" Mathews and Keith Oralmann have another on air spat. MSNBC never fails when it comes to providing some lulz.

AGH! Me too!
TWENTY FRICKIN' DAYS!

It happened in California. If Arnold isn't a super hero, who is? The Green Lantern is a nice choice, though.

In the words of my speech teacher: "I want to vote for a winner this year!"

Okay, just because we're all going to have a big void once Sarah Palin is forgotten... here's one last tidbit about her.
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2008/11/05/palin-didnt-know-africa-i_n_141653.html (http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2008/11/05/palin-didnt-know-africa-i_n_141653.html)

That's right... she didn't know Africa was a continent... we really dodged a bullet...

Hahahaha. Oh god.

It's funny how thick O'Reilly lays on the bullshit.

I've said it before and I'll say it again, McCain screwed up big time choosing Palin, although I avoid the Huffington Post and Failykos. What they said about Tony Snow when he died was sickening, good ol' libtards.

Holy crap, I knew Palin was an idiot, but WOW.
I also heard that McCain really, really wanted Lieberman but his campaign managers said "no, he's pro-choice, it'll piss off the base" so they went with crazy Jesus freak base lady who pissed off the 90% of the country who isn't "the base".

Liberman would have been an damn good choice, or Romany would have been decent as well.

I still wish I knew why McCain choose Palin. He would have had a better chance if he picked anyone but Palin, also I hear she might be running in 2012.

If I may be so bold, my reading of it was always that the McCain camp was hamfistedly attempting to court disenchanted Hillary Clinton supporters after Obama won the nomination for the Democratic Party. I really, honestly suspect that the McCain campaign genuinely believed that female voters in particular would vote for any ol' dame that was shoved into the limelight, regardless of her politics or her overall competence. (What's really distressing is that among some women, this appears to have been true.) Any woman would do! Any woman at all! Condescending? Yep. Cynical? Yep. Miserable failure? Oh, yes.

There were some people who, for a day or so, did switch to the McCain/Palin camp.

Then they found out a few of her views.

Maybe he knew how easy it would be to make fun of her on SNL.... >.>

Maybe McCain picked her because he wanted to throw the election and allow the world to like America again. People in other countries are pretty happy about it. I'm in Brazil right now, by the way.

Oh, neat. So you'd say the climate's quite positive over there? I'm really interested in how the people of other countries feel about this; it seems like it was really big news worldwide.

Oh yeah. There are Newsweek and NY Times articles that cite various European notables, saying things like, "He is our President, too." Plus pictures, lots and lots of pictures, of people celebrating around the world. It's pretty darn amazing.

Well, Brazil isn't going nuts like I hear lots of other places are, but they still are pretty positive about it. My sister is French so I can get news from there too. Pretty much everyone wanted us to get rid of the Republicans, who have very much been "Let's do what we want and ignore any opinions from the rest of the world" for the past 8 years. As far as I can tell all of the civilized countries are more liberal than we are and I think the people in poor countries are just happy to see the most powerful guy in the world not being white again.

I love the people who are afraid that having a liberal in office will destroy freedom of speech and ruin the country. Because liberal countries like Norway are totalitarian hellholes. ::)

Well I'm not afraid of a Liberal being in the white house. I'm an Independent, but I'm gonna give Obama a chance and see what he can bring to the tabel for this country, cause god knows we need it. So, best of luck Obama.

What's even better are people claiming they'll move to Canada to escape Obama's new healthcare and other parts of his "socialist" agenda.

I've heard this stuff as well Hobo and it's a shame, I think people should at least give him chance and what makes this even funnier is, he's not in office yet lol.

No no no.

It's funny because Canada is far more liberal than the US is, and has had National Healthcare and all that for quite some time.  Their conservative party is more liberal than our Democratic Party.

ah, gotcha. Went right over my head lol.

I think it's total hipocrasy that we're supposed to be capitalistic but peole want more government services.... >_>

I believe that has more to do with the size of the federal government, rather than our economic system.

you'd think so, wouldn't you

but the government has been pretty huge lately, and services have been trending down

as far as I know (I'm not a business major or anything) it is perfectly possible to have a (somewhat*) free market economy and a government that provides plenty of services through taxation; the only fudgy area is when the government subsumes an industry or part of it into itself: see the United States Postal Service. But you've got other options there, too, like UPS and sech, which are allowed to exist along with the government controlled one

which is to say that while there is (or might be (or there has been an observed)) correlation between economic principles and social programs, one is not (necessarily) causal to the other

There's also the fact that were the Federal Government to act in a completely Free Market Capitalism way, they would still need to give its citizens things as reasons to not reside in other nations, just like any company can't do nothing for its workers, because they'd quit.

Isn't that what I said?

With all the military spending that's gone on in the past couple years, the economy really should be in much better shape than it is.

Not sure, I had thought you meant bigger gov't --> more services, which is on the surface somewhat logical. At least, more logical that smaller gov't --> more services, which... I mean how would that even work.

It's called "efficiency".

...

This.
Gundam Fight Set! Ready... Go!

Oh lordy this is rich. First because the tables have turned--I remember many democrats saying they'd move to Canada or Europe to escape another four years of Bush, though of course nobody did that. Second, it's gross because of the ignorance that Hobo pointed up.


It's not really hypocrisy. Pure capitalism and pure socialism don't really exist. It's more a question of what you tend towards. Europe seems the closest to a happy medium.

Also, the person wanting free market probably isn't the same person that's asking for more government services. I think you're lumping people together too quickly.

---

This, I feel, could open up into an interesting discussion of what separates a business from a government. I'm inclined to say that there isn't much of a difference, except that governments have more moral obligations. Also, I guess in structure, governments have more structural variety. Otherwise, I see many similarities.

National identity is the company label!

I have a friend whose father says he's going to do this, since Obama is the new President and said father is a hardcore srs bsns Republican.

Except, replace 'Canada' with 'Costa Rica'.

Ignoring that Costa Rica is actually highly liberal.

So, yeah.

If he's got enough American dollars, he can probably do whatever he wants in Costa Rica.

That might just be my ignorance and assumptions on how Central America works, though.

I really don't see this election as a good thing.

Barack Obama spent his teen years as a drug casualty.

He spent his adult years immersing himself in Marxist ideology, hanging out with the powerful crooks, radicals and yes, terrorists in Chicago. Supported by some pretty shady characters to say the least like William Ayers and Rashid Khalidi to get elected to the Illinois Senate, he was absent, missed meetings, and voted "present" about 130 times.  The equivalent of "I don't know."  This pattern continued in the U.S. Senate.  I have to wonder about a candidate endorsed by members of the PLO, Hamas and the leadership of Iran.

Joe Biden is a piece of work too.  A guy reputedly with an IQ of more than 140 but who plagiarised his way through life, first with Syracuse University Law School, and then politically by lifting entire sections of speeches delivered by Robert Kennedy, Hubert Humphrey and even British Labor Party leader Neal Kinnock among others.  Maybe Obama found something of a soul mate, as his own speeches were littered with examples lifted from George Bush's speeches from his 2000 campaign run.  And then there's the fact that Biden just flat out makes stuff up.  Half of his "facts" in the vice-presidential debates were skewed or complete fabrications, but that's just what Joe Biden does routinely.

If this wasn't bad enough, the democrats who are the epitome of deficit spending are now in control of our economy.  And I mean in a huge and very bad way.  The top five contributors from failed government-sponsored financial enterprise Fannie Mae to members of Congress include Barack Obama, who is number three.  Barney Frank, House Financial Services Committee Chair who oversaw Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, was a lover of one of their officers, a guy named Herb Moses. Rahm Emmanuel, Obama's pick for chief of staff, was a long time democrat arm twister in the House and served on the board of Freddie Mac.  So is it any surprise that when President Bush and Senator McCain tried to force Congressional attention on the problems of these financial institutions years ago, the democrats protected their sacred pig?

Speaker Nancy Pelosi and Senate leader Harry Reid want to spend even MORE of our money to give out to industry giants such as the Big Three automakers among many, many others, even after the 700 billion plus stimulus package.  When prominent democrat Senator Chris Dodd, of all people, cautions that we're spending too much of the taxpayer's money - our money for those who actually work for a living - you know somethinbg's wrong in Washington.  And Obama has insanely expensive plans for far more government programs, while saying nothing about the expensive joke known as Social Security, doomed to die from bankruptcy not too far in the future.  When the people who gave us the economic collapse of 2008 are completely in charge in 2009, how can you not conclude that the patients are now running the asylum?

The Stock Market has been telling us for a few weeks now how enthusiastic they are about the future administration.  Pundits have been offering excuses about consumer confidence, lack of credit and unemployment figures, but we've had worse before.  When you just aren't sure what Obama, Pelosi and Reid are going to do with the country, when they wouldn't do anything to stop a catastrophy they knew was coming, perhaps even allowing it in order to win power, why would you want to put your money out where these people can grab it?

I didn't read that whole wall of text, but


amuses me, because it was a democrat President who reigned during the greatest surplus we've had in the past thirty-some years.  Fiscal Conservatism hasn't been working for us lately.

Like, at all.

Suddenly, out of nowhere, Stryker

That is indeed pretty dire. It seems lifted from an article, though.

Re: Stryker.

FactCheck.Org Plz. (http://www.factcheck.org/)

Thank you.

You guys killed my brain.
And, R. Daniel, you only re-stated my point, so I don't think you were trying to understand what i was saying. People want free market in general, I really don't think I'm lumping.
Do you want the government medling in your Business?
No.
Do you want the government to give you everything for free? Well, not everything, but I bet you want free health care. Government services require money. The money comes from taxes. Do you want higher taxes?
No, you don't.
But they tax your business anyway to give you your free health care.
My cirlce got turned into a scribble somewhere...
But do you see my point? Free market is still affected by Gov't services.

Imagine how messed up it'd be if the post office wasn't gov't regulated...

Now I get you, Bllue. Perhaps the original post was jumbled or my brain was jumbled.

Ah... I don't mind them at all, myself. Just throwing that out there for the sake of countering generalizations here, I guess. :'D

I don't pay them... ;D