?

Log in

 
 
06 November 2012 @ 11:53 pm
Kipling seems the only appropriate response to today.  


"That the Dog returns to his Vomit and the Sow returns to her Mire,
And the burnt Fool's bandaged finger goes wabbling back to the Fire."


I really hope we can survive this.


 
 
Current Location: The other America.
Current Mood: scaredscared
Current Music: Saint-seans - Danse Macabre.
 
 
 
jordan179jordan179 on November 7th, 2012 08:44 am (UTC)
Having re-elected the Obamessiah, we Americans are going to at least in part be responsible for the now almost-inevitable major war now brewing in the area between Libya's Western border and India's Eastern border. Oh, the Muslim Terrorist States will be guilty of the war crimes, but we will be guilty of sitting idly by and watching it happen. And the fact that the Terrorists' intended victims will doubtless make the Muslim Powers pay manyfold for their crimes before all this is over does not help matters: yes, the political elites in the Muslim Powers will die, but so will a lot of innocent Muslim men, women and children.
the room is full of ghostsyamamanama on November 7th, 2012 01:26 pm (UTC)
What's going on in Algeria and Bangladesh?

All right, all right, sarcasm aside, I know what you meant, so let me explain. Pakistan is on India's western border. Israel doesn't even border Libya.

Edited at 2012-11-07 01:39 pm (UTC)
Gordon: Angrezi Rajbaron_waste on November 7th, 2012 01:51 pm (UTC)

He's referring to the Ummah or “Islamosphere.”

the room is full of ghostsyamamanama on November 7th, 2012 01:55 pm (UTC)
It still makes no sense.
jordan179jordan179 on November 7th, 2012 03:45 pm (UTC)
Actually, I was referring to countries likely to be caught up in the large-scale war now likely to erupt between the Muslim Terrorist Powers and Israel and/or India.
Fritters: Megamind - No You Can't by nikkernoodlefritters on November 8th, 2012 10:42 pm (UTC)
Yes, I'm expecting something major between Israel and Iran.
jordan179jordan179 on November 7th, 2012 03:43 pm (UTC)
What's going on in Algeria and Bangladesh?

Very little worrisome to the United States of America or the Free World.

Pakistan is on India's western border. Israel doesn't even border Libya.

Libya gets included for the obvious reason that there is a major anti-American Terrorist Faction active there, and one which might wind up militarily supported by a Terrorist Egyptian regime if the Terrorists seize control of that country -- as appears rather possible. I included Libya, basically, for the same reason I included India -- she's a likely victim now.
Gordon: Alternate Historybaron_waste on November 7th, 2012 01:11 pm (UTC)
Oh, yah. Romney couldn't have undone it, and Obama isn't going to make it much worse. If there's one thing I sense strongly about him, he's a politician, and he knows not to rock the boat too hard - while still playing to his constituency, of course. There's going to be a lot of collectivist / racialist rhetoric [blacks at Wal Mart were crowing (no pun intended) at how they'd won the election] but now his attention will be on The Verdict of History, so he's (probably!) not going to do anything too stupid. Unless I'm totally wrong.
thudpucker: Farscape-Crais surrounded by idiots-saavthudpucker on November 7th, 2012 04:30 pm (UTC)


Your mouth to God's ears, friend. I'm just worried that he now believes he doesn't have to worry about reelection, and the gloves will come off. The verdict of history? Look at how history has treated FDR, whose policies extended the depression for years past its sell by date.

We'll see, I suppose. I was wondering if the Republicans in Congress should just let him have everything he wants, under the idea that once the policies he really wants take effect people might wake up and start to understand this man.

Sigh. Is it wrong to need a drink at eight thirty in the morning?


lironesslironess on November 7th, 2012 07:17 pm (UTC)
When every choice possible is aborant what should one do? I voted against the one I hated more....
thudpucker: Get Fuzzy-Satchel happy place-digic_iconthudpucker on November 7th, 2012 08:42 pm (UTC)


And you see, here's the thing... no one should vote based on the individual you like or dislike (or, more to the point, the individual popular media likes or dislikes). One should vote based on who will do the country the least harm.

With a press that despises him - and would have watchdogged him - as much as they do, do you honestly think that would have been Mitt?

We are basically well and truly screwed, now, and we've no one to blame but ourselves.


(Anonymous) on November 7th, 2012 08:49 pm (UTC)
I have to disagree in that the choices offered were both horrible and no choice at all really. If you think any third party honestly could have won you are fooling yourself...

This is not something that we had actual control over but yeah I vote anyways just so I have the right to bitch about it...

I think you are blaming the victims who are trying to make the best of a horrible situation no matter who they voted for. We the people do not choose the candidates and in all truth it is the EC who picks the winner...not the popular vote anyways...
lironesslironess on November 7th, 2012 08:51 pm (UTC)
I have to disagree in that the choices offered were both horrible and no choice at all really. If you think any third party honestly could have won you are fooling yourself...

This is not something that we had actual control over but yeah I vote anyways just so I have the right to bitch about it...

I think you are blaming the victims who are trying to make the best of a horrible situation no matter who they voted for. We the people do not choose the candidates and in all truth it is the EC who picks the winner...not the popular vote anyways...
thudpucker: AF-Gomez what?-masquerade_artsthudpucker on November 7th, 2012 09:29 pm (UTC)


I have to disagree in that the choices offered were both horrible and no choice at all really. If you think any third party honestly could have won you are fooling yourself...

Erm... I never said anything about any of this, really. Not about 'horrible choices' and certainly not about having to choose a third party one.

I just knew that we had a choice between a person who the press and the public is going to watch and monitor, and one that they are not, just as they've not watched and monitored him and his actions for the last four years.

Those were our options, and we allowed ourselves to be bamboozled - again - into choosing a person with no accountability who will NOT be called by the media on anything he does, even if he chooses to... oh, let's just go out on a limb, here... give twenty five hundred guns to Mexican drug cartels, guns used to kill several Americans and several hundred Mexicans, and to never be called on it, because our 'free press' believes it is more important to push a narrative of "Mitt hates your lady parts!" than to report something that any other generation of reporters would have sold their Mother by the kilo to have covered.

Not, of course, that the latter would ever happen here.

Oh, wait...



Gordon: States' Rightsbaron_waste on November 9th, 2012 02:06 pm (UTC)

I looked at the Libertarian candidate, I did. The problem is vote-splitting: Voting for a marginal candidate only takes strength away from the only candidate with any chance of winning. who would need every vote he could get. Not voting for him meant, in effect, voting for his opponent.

Besides, the Libertarian Party have had decades to get their act together and they've never done it. If they were a force to be reckoned with - but they a'n't.

thudpucker: Political-Electorate scorned-chambodiathudpucker on November 9th, 2012 04:44 pm (UTC)


No, I call myself a small 'l' libertarian, and believe in at least most of their principles, but I am not silly enough to believe that any large 'L' Libertarian will ever win national office. So I vote Republican, under the Matt Stone idea of "I hate conservatives, but I really fucking hate liberals."


Fritters: Hope is not a Foreign Policy by elektricfritters on November 8th, 2012 10:41 pm (UTC)
And that after this is accomplished, and the brave new world begins
When all men are paid for existing and no man must pay for his sins
thudpucker: Dr.Horrible-bash minds-iconsbycurtanathudpucker on November 9th, 2012 04:40 pm (UTC)


"In the Carboniferous Epoch we were promised abundance for all,
By robbing selected Peter to pay for collective Paul;
But, though we had plenty of money, there was nothing our money could buy,
And the Gods of the Copybook Headings said: 'If you don't work you die.'"

Seriously, I think this poem should be required reading before voting.