Even assuming they lacked legal claim, your "*way outside*" its original boarders is less than 110 meters (360 feet), and still within the existing terms and conditions of the War World II DMZ, completely legal under any standard of international treaty and law.
This map here, from that evil and ineffectual body we like to call the UN, shows that the wall is in places up to 10km from the Green Line and is currently planned to include about 15% of the West Bank.
And I am well aware of the situation following the 6 day war.
Theocracy is unacceptable in a liberal democracy, so why is it acceptable in Israel? One of our main criticisms of the muslim world is that many countries are conservatively theocratic. If you support theocracy, you must be opposed to the notion of the seperation of church and state, a cornerstone of modern US, european and commonwealth democracy.
Thanks for the lesson, but I do actually know how to speak English already. On the proliferation topic, from your own link:
Nuclear proliferation is the spread from nation to nation of nuclear technology, including nuclear power plants but especially nuclear weapons.
An Israeli nuclear installation is located about ten kilometers to the south of Dimona, the Negev Nuclear Research Center. Its construction commmenced in 1958, with French assistance.... [t]he purpose of Dimona is widely assumed to be the manufacturing of nuclear weapons, and the majority of defence experts have concluded that it does in fact do that.
As for the 'threat' posed by non-Jewish voters in Israel, start here, for example, or here. Quoting the second article: "Even if Sharon wins the national referendum, a part of the Right won't accept its results, insisting that only a "Jewish majority" is legitimate, and that the presence of Arab voters among the Israeli majority invalidates the decision." You will find plenty more about this policy position if you just google for info.
Think about it like this: you're on a mountainside, and you want to get to the top. Every decision you make is either a step uphill, a step downhill, or a step horizontally. The top is a democratic world where all people live without fear and with access to the services and freedoms that constitute basic human rights. At the bottom of the mountain is a hideous 1984-like morass of oppression and tyranny, where the poor and ignorant masses are abused and manipulated to serve the whims of their invisible taskmasters.
Re-electing Bush is a big step downhill, at least it is in my opinion. Ask yourself if at the very least Kerry might not be a step uphill, or at least a horizontal one. Vote accordingly.
"with what he knew and said THEN it's clear he would have done the same thing as Bush."
Complete and utter b.s. With all due respect, if you really think things would have gone the same if Kerry was President then your understanding of political dynamics is pretty damn poor.
The reason Kerry has said so many stupid things about Iraq along the lines that 'he would have done the same thing as Bush', and the reason he voted for it back when the war started, is that it is essential (in his opinion, or his strategists') that he be seen to be patriotic, and the media/social frenzy of patriotism requires that all good Americans support U.S. foreign policy in the wake of 9-11. Does this mean that he would have actually done the same thing? NO, it does not.
Plus, you ignore the massive and concerted effort to orchestrate the conditions for war that was undertaken by Wolfowitz, Cheney, Rumsfeld, Bush, Rice and Powell amongst many others. Without the big plan they had to whip up support for the invasion it would never have happened, and I do not believe that a President Kerry (or Gore for that matter) would have implemented such a plan.
"At any time the US was ready to render the USSR a radioactive wasteland. Do you really think that if a vital US interest is at stake that we won't face down any smaller country?"
Of course they were't 'ready' to do this 'at any time.' The Cold War was in fact a frantic effort by sane men on both sides of the Atlantic to prevent the destruction of all life on earth at the hands of men who felt they were thusly 'ready.'
The US would NOT be stupid enough to enter into a regional conflict on such a flimsy basis as the one used to justify the Iraq war if there was any significant likelihood that the opposing side would use nuclear weapons.
I find this interesting too - here in Australia the 'chattering classes' are constantly pilloried and their opinions marginalised and ignored. The basic meaning of the phrase seems to be 'people who take the time to actually think about what is going on and discuss it with each other and the world in general.' This is apparently a Bad Thing.
Another one I like is the phrase 'do-gooder', i.e. someone who always wants to make sure that things work out well for everyone in a given problem/situation. This is also apparently a term of derision, although I'm not sure I understand why.
Not that I want to get embroiled in a flame war but...
If Israel wants to pull back to it's original borders, as mandated by the UN and defined at the time of its creation, close those borders, and build the biggest frickin wall in history, NO ONE WILL COMPLAIN. If they want to shoot any Palestians who try to cross that wall, that would probably be tolerable too. If they really want to, they can build a giant dome over the whole of Israel and not let anyone in or out. Fine, fine fine.
The problems are:
(a) Israel is building a big fuckoff wall *way outside* those borders, conveniently annexing large swathes of territory that do not belong to Israel with NO JUSTIFICATION
(b) Israel is pursuing a systematic policy of colonising a foreign territory with 'native' Israelis
(c) Israelis forces are performing violent operations against civilian, terrorist and militia forces alike with no real concern as to which is which, outside its own territory, with no international sanction and indeed against international law and consensus
(d) the Israeli government actually talks about maintaining the genetic purity of Israel (ah the irony) in the sense of making sure that at least 50% of Israelis are Jewish so that there can never be a 'democratic coup' inside Israel at election time
(e) Israel, unlike other nations, is completely ignored in all the hubbub from the west about nuclear proliferation despite possessing 100-200 nuclear warheads.
Most of these things are contrary to international law (which Bush and Blair now spit on but which still matters to most countries); some are contrary to domestic Israeli law; all are contrary to basic standards for ethical behaviour.
Incidentally, I genuinely like the Israeli people and I fully support their right to live free from the fear of suicide bombers or invasion by their neighbours. But the way Israel is going about its business at the moment is just atrociously bad.
Relax, it happens all the time. And of course, if you dare mention it you are 'trolling', it's the only way that the mod junta can keep dissent in line - punish those who complain as an example to others:)
Seriously though, I know how annoying it is when posts just 'disappear'. It's happened to me a few times after I've written epic posts... nowadays I make sure to just Ctrl-C anything of length that I write in case it all goes belly-up when I click 'submit'.
As for the mods... if you want a real laugh write something thoughtful about how Apple is an ordinary company that wants to make money just as much as Microsoft does, and watch the mod-censors move in with ruthless efficiency and terminate you, while every reply disputing your claims receives '+5 insightful'.
"All those who were surprised about the way the 2000 election went never really understood our election process in the beginning."
Complete b.s. Most informed forners undertand how your system works perfectly - and not very well is one description that comes to mind. And you are not going to tell me you weren't 'surprised' when the US was without a president for a month as the parties brawled it out in the Floridan and Supreme Courts, while acrimonious recriminations reverbrated from coast to coast in the most politically divisive atmosphere since the 1960s.
The 2000 election was a shambolic, third world-style embarassment, and an insult to the shared traditions of democracy that we in the developed world like to call our heritage. It highlighted the many glaring flaws in the US system, including (but not limited to):
- hundreds of millions of dollars being required to win the election - states controlling the voting process - politically appointed election officials(! WTF? This would never happen in a million years where I come from, it's completely outrageous). - politically appointed judges deciding about the fate of the person who potentially appoints their successors (!!!!) - widespread allegations of vote rigging through intimidation and 'blacklisting' of eligible voters (would be enough to require a reelection in many countries)
I look forwards to Episode II: The End of Democracy.
1 connect a USB or FireWire drive.
2 Go out on a limb and *replace* it.
That was kinda my point - if I have, say, 100GB, and I want an extra 100GB, I would have to (a) fork out for a 200GB disk or (b) fork out for an external enclosure and have a 'rats-nest of wires' on my desk... the horror! But either way it costs me money. And how exactly do I transfer the data without another Mac?
1 Your beige box is noisier - Actually it's pretty close to silent using a Vantec fan and an AOpen noise killer case.
takes up a lot more space and probably has a rats-next of wires coming out the back. - Yeah, but it's under my desk in an unobtrusive position, so neither of these things affect me. Plus I can actually play games, burn cds from disc-to-disc, store loads of data and upgrade at will... seems like a fair trade to me.
2 4 Hard drives ?! That must be noisy as sin. I used to have 3 and that was bad enough. - Well, I don't know what kind of hard drives you were using but mine are extremely quiet Western Digitals and because there is ample space in my case, they don't require anything in the way of individual cooling. I couldn't tell the difference between the noise of 4 and the noise of 1 in my case, to be honest.
Actually I build my own machine, selecting each part myself based on a number of criteria, including reputation for quality. I wouldn't be surprised if there were even some parts from companies that the mighty Apple sees fit to deal with. I would buy an Apple over a Dell, but I would not sacrifice the level of flexibility I have now for an iMac. And in many other areas I have an advantage - for example, I have had optical audio output for far longer than it has been available (for less than an outrageous upgrade fee) on Macs.
So stick with your cheap Apple-clone and leave the quality computers to those of us that are willing to build them ourselves...
Is it just me, or does that thing only take 1 HDD? If this is the case, how do you upgrade?
Seems like in some ways, Apple clearly favours form over function. My current, beige-box PC has 4 hard drives... if I run out of space, I just slap in a new one for $50-$200 depending on what size I need and how rich I am. As far as I can see, if you run out of space on the G5 iMac, you have to buy a new iMac or at least replace your hard disk with a new one.
Regarding the video card, I find the following quote quite funny, from Apple's site:
The sizzling graphics processor and next-generation high-bandwidth architecture kicks 3D games and graphics into high gear, with three times the frame rate as the previous iMac in Unreal Tournament 2004.
A 5200 is THREE TIMES faster than their old card?! What was it, a Voodoo 1 or something? And people claim that serious gamers should consider buying Apple products. Also note the excellent grammar, the MarketingBot that wrote this was obviously concentrating too hard on packing in all those adjectives.
I can't believe that merely opening the case ever voided the warranty! I mean, if you open a case and look inside, how can this possibly be related to a hard disk failure, for example? Or faulty RAM?
I suspect most PC owners here would not buy a machine from a manufacturer that prohibited the opening of the case. I also know that in many countries such a prohibition would be ineffective because of statutory warranty regimes - in Australia, for instance, Apple could not refuse claims within 1 year for faulty manufacture or assembly, no matter if you disassembled the entire thing down to its constituent parts and then put it back together. Unles they could show that you actually broke it when you disassembled it, they would be legally bound to stand by the quality of their product and honour any warranty claims within that period.
To quote Rage Against the Machine, 'wake up.' Companies are heavily involved in politics, because politics is just an expression of the competing needs and aims of the members of society, and the corporation is just a way of aggregting the needs and aims of a small group of those members in an organised and efficient way. Those needs and aims happen to be the desire to make money; this is not an apolitical objective in this context.
They're a company, and they have no obligation to the people of China to fight for their freedom of speech.
...which is exactly why many people hate or fear corporations.
Let me ask you this: if China gets uninhibited access to the benefits of 'free' markets, including the participation of western companies, what incentive do they have to reform their human rights abuses?
Another question: Based on your arguments, do you therefore boycott any US company that does business in China? After all, it's up to you to make a difference.
After war, money is the most effective way to change another country's behaviour. In fact, I believe you could argue that it's more effective than war, because it tends to produce less resentment and society-wide anger. If we say 'that's just business' we are putting a rubber stamp on China's current activities.
That episode is so funny, it was tempting to put the whole thing in. IMHO the funniest Simpsons ever...
Clinton Aide: People are becoming a bit confused by the way you and your opponent are... well... constantly holding hands.
Dole-alien: The politics of failure have failed. We must make them work again.
Bob Dole: What the hell is this? Some kind of tube?
Kodos: I am Clin-Ton. As overlord, all will kneel trembling before me and obey my brutal commands. End communication. Marge: That's Slick Willy for you, always with the smooth talk.
How good would it be to see an interviewer sit down and totally grill Bush or Kerry for a good hour, with no aides or press secretaries, or time limits to force them to move on, and with no fear of losing 'access' and no drip-fed policy announcements and spin.
I often think about this. I think I have decided that open press conferences should be consitutionally mandates. The President should have to face the public and the press at least once a week throughout his term, and during the campaign there should be both compulsory debates and compulsory open press conferences. None of this stage managed bullshit.
My favourite US-ism from recent times is that some of the prisoners at Guantanamo Bay are charged with "attempting to kill Americans." Apparently it would have been ok if their intended victims were Canadian. Cue lame anti-Canada jokes...
Well, you've outdone me by a good ten years with your unique take on sarcastic parody. Your brilliant feigning of ignorance and faux-praise have cut through me like a rapier. I was unprepared for this level of subtlety and satire on the Internet which to me has previously been the most unassuming and earnest of places. And from a./ nerd of all people! Well I never.
Slashdot Mirror
Even assuming they lacked legal claim, your "*way outside*" its original boarders is less than 110 meters (360 feet), and still within the existing terms and conditions of the War World II DMZ, completely legal under any standard of international treaty and law.
This map here, from that evil and ineffectual body we like to call the UN, shows that the wall is in places up to 10km from the Green Line and is currently planned to include about 15% of the West Bank.
And I am well aware of the situation following the 6 day war.
"The state of Israel is a theocracy"
Theocracy is unacceptable in a liberal democracy, so why is it acceptable in Israel? One of our main criticisms of the muslim world is that many countries are conservatively theocratic. If you support theocracy, you must be opposed to the notion of the seperation of church and state, a cornerstone of modern US, european and commonwealth democracy.
Thanks for the lesson, but I do actually know how to speak English already. On the proliferation topic, from your own link:
... [t]he purpose of Dimona is widely assumed to be the manufacturing of nuclear weapons, and the majority of defence experts have concluded that it does in fact do that.
Nuclear proliferation is the spread from nation to nation of nuclear technology, including nuclear power plants but especially nuclear weapons.
An Israeli nuclear installation is located about ten kilometers to the south of Dimona, the Negev Nuclear Research Center. Its construction commmenced in 1958, with French assistance.
As for the 'threat' posed by non-Jewish voters in Israel, start here, for example, or here. Quoting the second article: "Even if Sharon wins the national referendum, a part of the Right won't accept its results, insisting that only a "Jewish majority" is legitimate, and that the presence of Arab voters among the Israeli majority invalidates the decision." You will find plenty more about this policy position if you just google for info.
Think about it like this: you're on a mountainside, and you want to get to the top. Every decision you make is either a step uphill, a step downhill, or a step horizontally. The top is a democratic world where all people live without fear and with access to the services and freedoms that constitute basic human rights. At the bottom of the mountain is a hideous 1984-like morass of oppression and tyranny, where the poor and ignorant masses are abused and manipulated to serve the whims of their invisible taskmasters.
Re-electing Bush is a big step downhill, at least it is in my opinion. Ask yourself if at the very least Kerry might not be a step uphill, or at least a horizontal one. Vote accordingly.
Harm minimisation - make it work for you!
"with what he knew and said THEN it's clear he would have done the same thing as Bush."
Complete and utter b.s. With all due respect, if you really think things would have gone the same if Kerry was President then your understanding of political dynamics is pretty damn poor.
The reason Kerry has said so many stupid things about Iraq along the lines that 'he would have done the same thing as Bush', and the reason he voted for it back when the war started, is that it is essential (in his opinion, or his strategists') that he be seen to be patriotic, and the media/social frenzy of patriotism requires that all good Americans support U.S. foreign policy in the wake of 9-11. Does this mean that he would have actually done the same thing? NO, it does not.
Plus, you ignore the massive and concerted effort to orchestrate the conditions for war that was undertaken by Wolfowitz, Cheney, Rumsfeld, Bush, Rice and Powell amongst many others. Without the big plan they had to whip up support for the invasion it would never have happened, and I do not believe that a President Kerry (or Gore for that matter) would have implemented such a plan.
"At any time the US was ready to render the USSR a radioactive wasteland. Do you really think that if a vital US interest is at stake that we won't face down any smaller country?"
Of course they were't 'ready' to do this 'at any time.' The Cold War was in fact a frantic effort by sane men on both sides of the Atlantic to prevent the destruction of all life on earth at the hands of men who felt they were thusly 'ready.'
The US would NOT be stupid enough to enter into a regional conflict on such a flimsy basis as the one used to justify the Iraq war if there was any significant likelihood that the opposing side would use nuclear weapons.
Go and rent Dr Strangelove.
I find this interesting too - here in Australia the 'chattering classes' are constantly pilloried and their opinions marginalised and ignored. The basic meaning of the phrase seems to be 'people who take the time to actually think about what is going on and discuss it with each other and the world in general.' This is apparently a Bad Thing.
Another one I like is the phrase 'do-gooder', i.e. someone who always wants to make sure that things work out well for everyone in a given problem/situation. This is also apparently a term of derision, although I'm not sure I understand why.
Not that I want to get embroiled in a flame war but...
If Israel wants to pull back to it's original borders, as mandated by the UN and defined at the time of its creation, close those borders, and build the biggest frickin wall in history, NO ONE WILL COMPLAIN. If they want to shoot any Palestians who try to cross that wall, that would probably be tolerable too. If they really want to, they can build a giant dome over the whole of Israel and not let anyone in or out. Fine, fine fine.
The problems are:
(a) Israel is building a big fuckoff wall *way outside* those borders, conveniently annexing large swathes of territory that do not belong to Israel with NO JUSTIFICATION
(b) Israel is pursuing a systematic policy of colonising a foreign territory with 'native' Israelis
(c) Israelis forces are performing violent operations against civilian, terrorist and militia forces alike with no real concern as to which is which, outside its own territory, with no international sanction and indeed against international law and consensus
(d) the Israeli government actually talks about maintaining the genetic purity of Israel (ah the irony) in the sense of making sure that at least 50% of Israelis are Jewish so that there can never be a 'democratic coup' inside Israel at election time
(e) Israel, unlike other nations, is completely ignored in all the hubbub from the west about nuclear proliferation despite possessing 100-200 nuclear warheads.
Most of these things are contrary to international law (which Bush and Blair now spit on but which still matters to most countries); some are contrary to domestic Israeli law; all are contrary to basic standards for ethical behaviour.
Incidentally, I genuinely like the Israeli people and I fully support their right to live free from the fear of suicide bombers or invasion by their neighbours. But the way Israel is going about its business at the moment is just atrociously bad.
Relax, it happens all the time. And of course, if you dare mention it you are 'trolling', it's the only way that the mod junta can keep dissent in line - punish those who complain as an example to others :)
Seriously though, I know how annoying it is when posts just 'disappear'. It's happened to me a few times after I've written epic posts... nowadays I make sure to just Ctrl-C anything of length that I write in case it all goes belly-up when I click 'submit'.
As for the mods... if you want a real laugh write something thoughtful about how Apple is an ordinary company that wants to make money just as much as Microsoft does, and watch the mod-censors move in with ruthless efficiency and terminate you, while every reply disputing your claims receives '+5 insightful'.
Anyone else feel that it's a bit much to have to sit through 'a word from our sponsor' before watching an *advertisment* for a game?
This is exactly why I don't use Gamespot anymore.
"All those who were surprised about the way the 2000 election went never really understood our election process in the beginning."
Complete b.s. Most informed forners undertand how your system works perfectly - and not very well is one description that comes to mind. And you are not going to tell me you weren't 'surprised' when the US was without a president for a month as the parties brawled it out in the Floridan and Supreme Courts, while acrimonious recriminations reverbrated from coast to coast in the most politically divisive atmosphere since the 1960s.
The 2000 election was a shambolic, third world-style embarassment, and an insult to the shared traditions of democracy that we in the developed world like to call our heritage. It highlighted the many glaring flaws in the US system, including (but not limited to):
- hundreds of millions of dollars being required to win the election
- states controlling the voting process
- politically appointed election officials(! WTF? This would never happen in a million years where I come from, it's completely outrageous).
- politically appointed judges deciding about the fate of the person who potentially appoints their successors (!!!!)
- widespread allegations of vote rigging through intimidation and 'blacklisting' of eligible voters (would be enough to require a reelection in many countries)
I look forwards to Episode II: The End of Democracy.
From Macworld:
LaCie Bigger Disk
Price as rated: $1,199
Uh... huh...
1 connect a USB or FireWire drive.
2 Go out on a limb and *replace* it.
That was kinda my point - if I have, say, 100GB, and I want an extra 100GB, I would have to (a) fork out for a 200GB disk or (b) fork out for an external enclosure and have a 'rats-nest of wires' on my desk... the horror! But either way it costs me money. And how exactly do I transfer the data without another Mac?
1 Your beige box is noisier - Actually it's pretty close to silent using a Vantec fan and an AOpen noise killer case.
takes up a lot more space and probably has a rats-next of wires coming out the back. - Yeah, but it's under my desk in an unobtrusive position, so neither of these things affect me. Plus I can actually play games, burn cds from disc-to-disc, store loads of data and upgrade at will... seems like a fair trade to me.
2 4 Hard drives ?! That must be noisy as sin. I used to have 3 and that was bad enough. - Well, I don't know what kind of hard drives you were using but mine are extremely quiet Western Digitals and because there is ample space in my case, they don't require anything in the way of individual cooling. I couldn't tell the difference between the noise of 4 and the noise of 1 in my case, to be honest.
Actually I build my own machine, selecting each part myself based on a number of criteria, including reputation for quality. I wouldn't be surprised if there were even some parts from companies that the mighty Apple sees fit to deal with. I would buy an Apple over a Dell, but I would not sacrifice the level of flexibility I have now for an iMac. And in many other areas I have an advantage - for example, I have had optical audio output for far longer than it has been available (for less than an outrageous upgrade fee) on Macs.
So stick with your cheap Apple-clone and leave the quality computers to those of us that are willing to build them ourselves...
Is it just me, or does that thing only take 1 HDD? If this is the case, how do you upgrade?
Seems like in some ways, Apple clearly favours form over function. My current, beige-box PC has 4 hard drives... if I run out of space, I just slap in a new one for $50-$200 depending on what size I need and how rich I am. As far as I can see, if you run out of space on the G5 iMac, you have to buy a new iMac or at least replace your hard disk with a new one.
Regarding the video card, I find the following quote quite funny, from Apple's site:
The sizzling graphics processor and next-generation high-bandwidth architecture kicks 3D games and graphics into high gear, with three times the frame rate as the previous iMac in Unreal Tournament 2004.
A 5200 is THREE TIMES faster than their old card?! What was it, a Voodoo 1 or something? And people claim that serious gamers should consider buying Apple products. Also note the excellent grammar, the MarketingBot that wrote this was obviously concentrating too hard on packing in all those adjectives.
By writing that post you have demonstrated:
1. that you can type
2. that you can use a mouse
3. that you can use a web browser
I therefore find it very hard to believe that you are struggling to find porn.
I can't believe that merely opening the case ever voided the warranty! I mean, if you open a case and look inside, how can this possibly be related to a hard disk failure, for example? Or faulty RAM?
I suspect most PC owners here would not buy a machine from a manufacturer that prohibited the opening of the case. I also know that in many countries such a prohibition would be ineffective because of statutory warranty regimes - in Australia, for instance, Apple could not refuse claims within 1 year for faulty manufacture or assembly, no matter if you disassembled the entire thing down to its constituent parts and then put it back together. Unles they could show that you actually broke it when you disassembled it, they would be legally bound to stand by the quality of their product and honour any warranty claims within that period.
We should not expect companies to make political statements - we have politicians for that
Oh, ok, so I guess we should expect companies not to get involved in politics in the west either, right?
To quote Rage Against the Machine, 'wake up.' Companies are heavily involved in politics, because politics is just an expression of the competing needs and aims of the members of society, and the corporation is just a way of aggregting the needs and aims of a small group of those members in an organised and efficient way. Those needs and aims happen to be the desire to make money; this is not an apolitical objective in this context.
They're a company, and they have no obligation to the people of China to fight for their freedom of speech.
...which is exactly why many people hate or fear corporations.
Let me ask you this: if China gets uninhibited access to the benefits of 'free' markets, including the participation of western companies, what incentive do they have to reform their human rights abuses?
Another question: Based on your arguments, do you therefore boycott any US company that does business in China? After all, it's up to you to make a difference.
After war, money is the most effective way to change another country's behaviour. In fact, I believe you could argue that it's more effective than war, because it tends to produce less resentment and society-wide anger. If we say 'that's just business' we are putting a rubber stamp on China's current activities.
From the synopsis:
'The US is in yet another serious "non-depression" and the narrator is out of work again.'
So... yes.
That episode is so funny, it was tempting to put the whole thing in. IMHO the funniest Simpsons ever...
Clinton Aide: People are becoming a bit confused by the way you and your opponent are... well... constantly holding hands.
Dole-alien: The politics of failure have failed. We must make them work again.
Bob Dole: What the hell is this? Some kind of tube?
Kodos: I am Clin-Ton. As overlord, all will kneel trembling before me and obey my brutal commands. End communication.
Marge: That's Slick Willy for you, always with the smooth talk.
How good would it be to see an interviewer sit down and totally grill Bush or Kerry for a good hour, with no aides or press secretaries, or time limits to force them to move on, and with no fear of losing 'access' and no drip-fed policy announcements and spin.
I often think about this. I think I have decided that open press conferences should be consitutionally mandates. The President should have to face the public and the press at least once a week throughout his term, and during the campaign there should be both compulsory debates and compulsory open press conferences. None of this stage managed bullshit.
Doonesbury says it well.
My favourite US-ism from recent times is that some of the prisoners at Guantanamo Bay are charged with "attempting to kill Americans." Apparently it would have been ok if their intended victims were Canadian. Cue lame anti-Canada jokes...
Kent Brockman: Senator Dole, why should people vote for you instead of President Clinton?
............
..........
Kang: It makes no difference which one of us you vote for. Either way, your planet is doomed. DOOMED!
Kent: Well, a refreshingly frank response there from senator Bob Dole.
Homer: America, take a good look at your beloved candidates. They're nothing but hideous space reptiles.
[audience gasps in terror]
Kodos: It's true, we are aliens. But what are you going to do about it? It's a two-party system; you have to vote for one of us.
[murmurs]
Man1: He's right, this is a two-party system.
Man2: Well, I believe I'll vote for a third-party candidate.
Kang: Go ahead, throw your vote away!
Marge: I don't understand why we have to build a ray gun to aim at a planet I never even heard of.
Homer: Don't blame me, I voted for Kodos.
Well, you've outdone me by a good ten years with your unique take on sarcastic parody. Your brilliant feigning of ignorance and faux-praise have cut through me like a rapier. I was unprepared for this level of subtlety and satire on the Internet which to me has previously been the most unassuming and earnest of places. And from a ./ nerd of all people! Well I never.