(no subject)

[prog]

Hacking on Frivolity all day. Learning that Nader has decided to run makes me light-headed so I guess it's time for lunch. I know that a lot of people who voted for Nader in 2000, buying the line that Bush and Gore were interchangeable (do you remember that? wheeeeeeeeew), won't do so this time around. But still. Argh. Is Ross Perot still around? Can someone talk to him?

Meanwhile, I don't know anything about Kerry other than than jokes on the Daily Show. He is so not Clinton... he really does have all the charisma of a Hall of Presidents robot. I support all Uncanny Valley candidates. Barf. And I'll grimly support him in a few months, probably.

My boss says: I would vote for a random-number generator over Bush.

Comments

hey prog. what's up?

[(Anonymous)]

The Passion of The Christ (http://www.ThePassionOfTheChrist.com) is in theaters soon - this week on Wednesday.. what do you think about this movie? I'm going to see it for sure - the trailers (http://www.thepassion.tv) were enough to convince me. I read somewhere that it's the widest opening ever for a subtitled movie; I have a feeling subtitles won't detract from the full effect of this movie though. After looking at the trailers which have no subtitles or english at all, it was reinforced for me that lack of spoken english in this film won't hurt one bit. To sum up my impression of The Passion: it's a work of art.
Good Website (http://www.passion-movie.com)
Another fascinating aspect to this movie is all the controversy that has been generated about it.
Some people, not really representative of Jewish people, but rather self appointed Jewish spokespeople, such as Abraham Foxman from the Anti-Defamation League, seem to have been attempting to denounce this film for months as being anti-Semitic. The news reported that they even stole the script last year! But here's what some Jews say (Jews who don't make it their job to tear apart other people): by Rabbi Daniel Lapin.

Nice to see some people speaking rationally.

So what do you think of all this?

*** Kyle

Re: hey prog. what's up?

[prog.livejournal.com]

[xymotik.livejournal.com]

Who needs the Page of Shame when there's the Comedy Goldmine?

[xymotik.livejournal.com]

I trust the above blurb for The Passion is comment spam? I recently posted on rural_ruin and got a comment on why I should listen to some band. Delete.

The Bush/Gore two-heads-of-the-same-monster idea was very prevalent out here as well. I think it served as a reasonable litmus test as to how far disconnected one was from the political center. At least it didn't matter in CA and MA. Blame New Hampshire for 2000.

[dougo.livejournal.com]

Blame New Hampshire for 2000.

I blame Gore for being both uncharismatic and inconsistent, and the Democratic party elites for running such a stupid campaign. He didn't even take his own state, or Clinton's home state. I didn't not vote for Gore because he was "the same" as Bush, I didn't vote for Gore because he sucked (plus, I live in a non-swing state).

I also blame the lack of instant run-off voting. It would have been great to see how many people would have voted for "Nader OR Gore". (I also blame this for Schwarzenegger's election, and maybe even Dean's rapid demise.)

[xymotik.livejournal.com]

Perhaps I should've included a "smiley" or at least a longer explanation in the comment on NH. It's only one of the top ten (or more, many more) reasons for the utter fiasco of 2000. As an expat-Mainer, I hold all the standard petty grudges against New Hampshire: the freeway tolls resulting in huge backups, its entire leech state status (shared with Delaware and Nevada), and of course the politics. It was the only state in the entire northeast to go for Bush and those three electoral votes would've swung the entire election. Florida wouldn't have mattered a bit. The only other disaster one can compare 2000 to was the sinking of the Titanic--if any one of a dozen or so things would've gone just a bit differently, the outcome would've been dramatically altered.

I agree that Gore ran a sucky campaign and that ultimately the election was his to lose. From my brief experience in Tennessee and Arkansas, it's no surprise whatsoever that Gore didn't win either state. It's the cultural reasons, yet again.

Instant run-off voting would be great. At least requiring a majority instead of just a plurality would greatly help matters by requiring coalition building. But at the moment it's more a matter of who sucks the least. (I also don't think that most voters could possibly imagine just how horrible the Bush Administration's record could or would be, but at least its actions may pave the way for Kerry, who may rival Gore for (lack of) charisma.)

[cnoocy]

Ross Perot isn't around, but Roy Moore is. [crosses fingers]