Archimedinejad: And now about that lever...
- Drunken Idaho
- Posts: 1197
- Joined: 15 Sep 2008 23:56
- Location: Ontario, Canada
I say, be proud of your ignorance of all extraneous expanded universe Star Wars characters. Lucas does not need more idiots buying into his franchise. Although, I suppose IG-88 did have a brief appearance in Empire.
"The Idahos were never ordinary people."
-Reverend Mother Superior Alma Mavis Taraza
-Reverend Mother Superior Alma Mavis Taraza
- A Thing of Eternity
- Posts: 6090
- Joined: 08 Apr 2008 15:35
- Location: Calgary Alberta
- GamePlayer
- 70mm God
- Posts: 2993
- Joined: 09 Feb 2008 11:26
- Location: Toronto, Ontario, Canada
-
- Posts: 92
- Joined: 01 Oct 2008 10:30
In other Middle-Eastern news, the Israeli election results are mostly in!
1.Kadima/Likud -- these two have roughly the same amount of Knesset seats each (29/27 last I checked). While the count hasn't actually finished, the two parties and PM candidates (Kadima's Tzipi Livni and Likud's Binyamin Netanyahu) have already started chucking "fuck you" gestures to each other. Anyone familiar with Israeli bargaining methods will recognize this as the first step of coalition negotiations, with both PM candidates claiming to want to build a centrist coalition.
3.Yisrael Beiteinu (Israel Our Home), led by Avigdor "Racist Bastard" Lieberman. A hard-right-wing nationalist party devoted to not negotiating with Arabs except for definite gain. While I don't object to hard-line Zionism on principle (never expect to get someone to give up their homeland by chucking shitty bombs at them), unfortunately most of Yisrael Beiteinu are just huge, Israeli-style a-holes who may well take every opportunity to enact racist legislation against Israeli Arabs and piss off the Palestinian Arabs. This from a party founded to be the party of Soviet immigrants, some of whom aren't even really Jewish and feel little to no connection to the nation of Israel.
4.Labour-Meimad, led by Ehud Barak. Pretty much the mainstream leftist and social-democratic party of Israel. They currently claim that they will sit in opposition on the Knesset instead of joining a coalition government, as they refuse to share any coalition with Yisrael Beiteinu. I can't blame them. Supposedly the primary dovish party since the Meretz-Yachad Party is popularly known as the party that will give away the whole country to the Arabs, but Livni has at times said things more dovish than Labour-Meimad does.
Personally I'm hoping that either Livni or Netanyahu manages to actually form a centrist coalition, pushing Yisrael Beiteinu to the edges or even the opposition. There are enough small parties around that they could do it. Then maybe they could get around to the business of A) acknowledging that Hamas governs in Gaza and working with that, B) actually governing Israel instead of flying around trying to be diplomatic (something Israelis are congenitally incapable of), and C) maybe giving the country enough of a peaceful period for its economy to stabilize.
If I had actually had a vote this election (which I don't, due to not having Israeli citizenship yet), I would have protest-voted for the tiny little Hetz (yeah, חץ, them) party: a secular-Zionist, centrist, liberal party known for their anti-corruption stances and derived from the once-proud Shinui party.
1.Kadima/Likud -- these two have roughly the same amount of Knesset seats each (29/27 last I checked). While the count hasn't actually finished, the two parties and PM candidates (Kadima's Tzipi Livni and Likud's Binyamin Netanyahu) have already started chucking "fuck you" gestures to each other. Anyone familiar with Israeli bargaining methods will recognize this as the first step of coalition negotiations, with both PM candidates claiming to want to build a centrist coalition.
3.Yisrael Beiteinu (Israel Our Home), led by Avigdor "Racist Bastard" Lieberman. A hard-right-wing nationalist party devoted to not negotiating with Arabs except for definite gain. While I don't object to hard-line Zionism on principle (never expect to get someone to give up their homeland by chucking shitty bombs at them), unfortunately most of Yisrael Beiteinu are just huge, Israeli-style a-holes who may well take every opportunity to enact racist legislation against Israeli Arabs and piss off the Palestinian Arabs. This from a party founded to be the party of Soviet immigrants, some of whom aren't even really Jewish and feel little to no connection to the nation of Israel.
4.Labour-Meimad, led by Ehud Barak. Pretty much the mainstream leftist and social-democratic party of Israel. They currently claim that they will sit in opposition on the Knesset instead of joining a coalition government, as they refuse to share any coalition with Yisrael Beiteinu. I can't blame them. Supposedly the primary dovish party since the Meretz-Yachad Party is popularly known as the party that will give away the whole country to the Arabs, but Livni has at times said things more dovish than Labour-Meimad does.
Personally I'm hoping that either Livni or Netanyahu manages to actually form a centrist coalition, pushing Yisrael Beiteinu to the edges or even the opposition. There are enough small parties around that they could do it. Then maybe they could get around to the business of A) acknowledging that Hamas governs in Gaza and working with that, B) actually governing Israel instead of flying around trying to be diplomatic (something Israelis are congenitally incapable of), and C) maybe giving the country enough of a peaceful period for its economy to stabilize.
If I had actually had a vote this election (which I don't, due to not having Israeli citizenship yet), I would have protest-voted for the tiny little Hetz (yeah, חץ, them) party: a secular-Zionist, centrist, liberal party known for their anti-corruption stances and derived from the once-proud Shinui party.
Brian Herbert is a perfect example of why you shouldn't leave a universe-spanning empire to your next of kin.
- Drunken Idaho
- Posts: 1197
- Joined: 15 Sep 2008 23:56
- Location: Ontario, Canada
- A Thing of Eternity
- Posts: 6090
- Joined: 08 Apr 2008 15:35
- Location: Calgary Alberta
Oh we don't do we?Baraka Bryan wrote:lol... there's a big difference between a state with 30 parties running in an election and a dozen or more getting seats and a country with only 4 parties in a legislature. to have a functional government in Israel, they need coalitions. we don't here.Drunken Idaho wrote:Sounds vaguely familiar...
- A Thing of Eternity
- Posts: 6090
- Joined: 08 Apr 2008 15:35
- Location: Calgary Alberta
I'm just bugging you, I was moderately against the coalition myself. I really don't give a shit, our "democracy" is just a very loose aproximation of real democracy (pretty pathetic version of even parlimental democracy IMO), so I've stopped expecting it to function other than in the occasional sweeping averaging of opinions. Doesn't mean I'll stop voting, but I'm starting to get past the idea that the "will of the people" has much to do with our government.Baraka Bryan wrote:A Thing of Eternity wrote:Oh we don't do we?Baraka Bryan wrote:lol... there's a big difference between a state with 30 parties running in an election and a dozen or more getting seats and a country with only 4 parties in a legislature. to have a functional government in Israel, they need coalitions. we don't here.Drunken Idaho wrote:Sounds vaguely familiar...
nope... power in our country is concentrated in the hands of 2 large parties enough to get along without one the proposed coalition was unpopular with most liberals and a good chunk of NDPers too. the only party membership that had high support for it was the bloq... wonder why
- SandRider
- Watermaster
- Posts: 6163
- Joined: 05 Oct 2008 16:14
- Location: In the back of your mind. Always.
- Contact:
- Freakzilla
- Lead Singer and Driver of the Winnebego
- Posts: 18454
- Joined: 05 Feb 2008 01:27
- Location: Atlanta, Georgia, USA
- Contact:
- A Thing of Eternity
- Posts: 6090
- Joined: 08 Apr 2008 15:35
- Location: Calgary Alberta
No, I don't, and I agree that sometimes the people want the wrong thing (cough, often). I don't really want more democracy per-say, just more accurate democracy. I'd like to be able to vote for a slightly more capitalist economy and human rights with the same vote - but that's not on the ballot. I can't get smaller government without getting Christian values, and that makes me sad.Freakzilla wrote:We have a republic, as Ben Franklin said, "if we can keep her."
Do you think a true democracy would be better? Sometimes mob rule is not what's best.
- Freakzilla
- Lead Singer and Driver of the Winnebego
- Posts: 18454
- Joined: 05 Feb 2008 01:27
- Location: Atlanta, Georgia, USA
- Contact:
Originally Congressional Senators were supposed to be appointed by the State Legislatures, I think we lost a serious balance of power when that was changed to a popular vote.
Big Federal Government is bad, mmmmmkay?
Oh yeah, only white, male land owners should be able to vote, too.
Big Federal Government is bad, mmmmmkay?
Oh yeah, only white, male land owners should be able to vote, too.
Paul of Dune was so bad it gave me a seizure that dislocated both of my shoulders and prolapsed my anus.
~Pink Snowman
- SandRider
- Watermaster
- Posts: 6163
- Joined: 05 Oct 2008 16:14
- Location: In the back of your mind. Always.
- Contact:
- Drunken Idaho
- Posts: 1197
- Joined: 15 Sep 2008 23:56
- Location: Ontario, Canada
Huh? If a majority of the people want the "wrong thing" then who's to say what the "wrong thing" is? That's the beginning of dictatorship, in my opinion.A Thing of Eternity wrote:No, I don't, and I agree that sometimes the people want the wrong thing (cough, often). I don't really want more democracy per-say, just more accurate democracy. I'd like to be able to vote for a slightly more capitalist economy and human rights with the same vote - but that's not on the ballot. I can't get smaller government without getting Christian values, and that makes me sad.Freakzilla wrote:We have a republic, as Ben Franklin said, "if we can keep her."
Do you think a true democracy would be better? Sometimes mob rule is not what's best.
Though I'll agree with you that smaller gov seems to go hand-in-hand with Christian or "small-town" values. In fact, That's one of my major beefs with most conservative parties. I can't ignore the fact that they exploit the entire Christian population to get votes. IE Bush saying that God wanted him to go into Iraq (what would Jesus bomb? )... But I guess someone was going to take advantage of such a giant mass of retards. I think it's pretty pathetic.
I'm reminded of a great segment from the Daily Show, in which his correspondents are going around asking republicans to define "small-town values." The results were pretty hilarious. I tried to find the clip, but was semi-successful in that I found it, but could not view it due to my Canadian residency. Here it is for all you Yanks, however:
http://www.thedailyshow.com/video/index ... -team-ever
Sorry, my Canadian fellows, but I can't find this damned clip anywhere that we can view it. There are IP-masking programs out there that you can download to get around that.
If anyone can help clear up what small-town values really mean, I'd appreciate it, because so far as I can tell it's just a lame term conservative politicians use to get votes from small-town folk.
"The Idahos were never ordinary people."
-Reverend Mother Superior Alma Mavis Taraza
-Reverend Mother Superior Alma Mavis Taraza
- Freakzilla
- Lead Singer and Driver of the Winnebego
- Posts: 18454
- Joined: 05 Feb 2008 01:27
- Location: Atlanta, Georgia, USA
- Contact:
- Drunken Idaho
- Posts: 1197
- Joined: 15 Sep 2008 23:56
- Location: Ontario, Canada
- Freakzilla
- Lead Singer and Driver of the Winnebego
- Posts: 18454
- Joined: 05 Feb 2008 01:27
- Location: Atlanta, Georgia, USA
- Contact:
That's right.Drunken Idaho wrote:You fascist dictator!!!Freakzilla wrote:If the majority of people in my house want ice cream for dinner, that doesn't make it right.
But households are not democracies. Father knows best, right?
But I hope you see my point. I don't think the general population is intelligent as my children, I don't want their majority ruling my life.
Most citizens may want free college and healthcare but that doesn't mean it is necessarily best for the country.
Daddy still has to pay for all those goodies eventually.
Paul of Dune was so bad it gave me a seizure that dislocated both of my shoulders and prolapsed my anus.
~Pink Snowman
- A Thing of Eternity
- Posts: 6090
- Joined: 08 Apr 2008 15:35
- Location: Calgary Alberta
No no, I agree with you, but "who says what's wrong if the majority says it's right?" I DO. The majority of Christian Europe was anti-Semitic for the last 1400 years or so (see, school is teaching me something useful ) but that's still wrong. The majority of people in California are apparently against gay marriage, doesn't make that right. There has to be some kind of balance between giving the masses roughly what they want, while protecting whoever ends up in the minority from those masses.Drunken Idaho wrote:Huh? If a majority of the people want the "wrong thing" then who's to say what the "wrong thing" is? That's the beginning of dictatorship, in my opinion.A Thing of Eternity wrote:No, I don't, and I agree that sometimes the people want the wrong thing (cough, often). I don't really want more democracy per-say, just more accurate democracy. I'd like to be able to vote for a slightly more capitalist economy and human rights with the same vote - but that's not on the ballot. I can't get smaller government without getting Christian values, and that makes me sad.Freakzilla wrote:We have a republic, as Ben Franklin said, "if we can keep her."
Do you think a true democracy would be better? Sometimes mob rule is not what's best.
Though I'll agree with you that smaller gov seems to go hand-in-hand with Christian or "small-town" values. In fact, That's one of my major beefs with most conservative parties. I can't ignore the fact that they exploit the entire Christian population to get votes. IE Bush saying that God wanted him to go into Iraq (what would Jesus bomb? )... But I guess someone was going to take advantage of such a giant mass of retards. I think it's pretty pathetic.
Who decides what's right? Whoever wins, I guess.
- A Thing of Eternity
- Posts: 6090
- Joined: 08 Apr 2008 15:35
- Location: Calgary Alberta
I really have no valid opinion between rep. by pop. and what we have now (forgot the term temporarily), so I don't worry about that facet too much. I agree, true democracy would just take up too much time, plus most people don't know what they hell they're talking about anyways.Baraka Bryan wrote:true democracy is one-citizen-one-vote on all issues... obviously we need representatives... the question is how we choose them. I'm actually a proponent of proportional representation, despite the fact that my party is one that benefits from the single-member-plurality system, though in Canada with so many parties generating a decent proportion of support, it would lead to an incredibly fractured parliament, and without mandatory voting, it wouldn't exactly be representative (seeing as we only had 59% turnout in October )A Thing of Eternity wrote:No, I don't, and I agree that sometimes the people want the wrong thing (cough, often). I don't really want more democracy per-say, just more accurate democracy. I'd like to be able to vote for a slightly more capitalist economy and human rights with the same vote - but that's not on the ballot. I can't get smaller government without getting Christian values, and that makes me sad.Freakzilla wrote:We have a republic, as Ben Franklin said, "if we can keep her."
Do you think a true democracy would be better? Sometimes mob rule is not what's best.
I think mandatory voting is the way to go BUT, there must be a "fuck you, you all suck/ I have no idea" option on the ballot. I would absolutely LOVE to see this get put into law. LOVE to.
EDIT: My main issue is just that the parties come with too much baggage, and none of them are both moral and responsible in my opinion. I think we need an entirely new system of voting that is NOT party based. I have some ideas, but nothing solid yet.
- A Thing of Eternity
- Posts: 6090
- Joined: 08 Apr 2008 15:35
- Location: Calgary Alberta