Saturday, July 03, 2004

SchizoSociety example #1 

Did you see this one?

Voting Official Seeks Terrorist Guidelines...

The government needs to establish guidelines for canceling or rescheduling elections if terrorists strike the United States again, says the chairman of a new federal voting commission.

Such guidelines do not currently exist, said DeForest B. Soaries, head of the voting panel.

Soaries was appointed to the federal Election Assistance Commission last year by President Bush (news - web sites). Soaries said he wrote to National Security (news - web sites) Adviser Condoleezza Rice (news - web sites) and Homeland Security Secretary Tom Ridge in April to raise the concerns.

"I am still awaiting their response," he said. "Thus far we have not begun any meaningful discussion." Spokesmen for Rice and Ridge did not immediately respond to requests for comment.

The first 50% view...
Bush is planning to steal the next election. No guidelines exist because it will be an unprecedented event in American history. No meaningful discussion will occur because "W" wants no guideline in place. One of three things will happen--(1) they'll "find" Osama bin Laden, magically, in late October; (b) a terrorist scare will delay the election, or keep people off the streets on election day; or (c) martial law will be declared, and there will be no election.

(My opinion: Bush will win anyway, without any of the above)

The second 50% view...
No guideline needs to occur. Elections are sacred in the US. Dems think the election will be stolen because they still can't let go of the last election. That election was won fair and square--move on (just not MoveOn.org)!

(My opinion: Bush will lose anyway, in the popular vote, but the "swing" states will "support" him one way or the other).

If you don't believe this is SchizoSociety #1, bring it up with one of your "conservative" friends and then with one of your "liberal" friends. Note the difference in opinion.


Friday, July 02, 2004


One of the most absurd things put forth by any number of silly people--including at least one editor of the Economist (before my subscription ran out)--was that "W"'s presidency was not causing a schism in society. That things were not getting polarized.

A good friend of mine recently sent an "anti-Bush" bumper sticker to one of his friends, and the friend replied "I do not share your sentiments." They are no longer friends.

Neighbors are looking up their neighbors' contributions to campaigns on line in record numbers. Big companies are trying to get employees to sign up for their political activist committees. It's everywhere. Partisanship has reached a ludicrous level. I will show in several blogs how this manifests itself in oddball behavior, self-destructive tribalism and other signs of a society not-so-slowly unraveling.


This page is powered by Blogger. Isn't yours?