Sanding our assholes with 150 grit.

Excellent essay about life as work

http://web.ionsys.com/~remedy/Quitting%20The%20Paint%20Factory.htm

A reference came from the lazy guy site. I think the anti-Bush jabs turned an excellent essay into a political piece, but nonetheless it's an interesting read.

This came via the laziest man route.
Permalink Dennis Forbes 
March 17th, 2005
Why is it that an excellent essay and a political piece are mutually exclusive? You seem to imply that they are.
Permalink muppet 
March 17th, 2005
They aren't mutually exclusive, but the political commentary seemed out of place and unnecessary to the powerful message the essay conveys. A powerful, psychological observation turned into a partisan piece with just a few choice words (such as "unelected").
Permalink Dennis Forbes 
March 17th, 2005
I read this article a few months ago. Skimming it now, it reminded me of The Rebel Sell.

http://www.thismagazine.ca/issues/2002/11/rebelsell.php
Permalink MarkTAW 
March 17th, 2005
Well, in at least the 2000 election, he WAS "unelected". There's nothing partisan about that, it's verifiable.
Permalink muppet 
March 17th, 2005
Ridiculous that I'm defending Bush, but alas.

"There's nothing partisan about that, it's verifiable."

By the rules governing the democracy of the republic of the United States, Bush was elected. Whether he got more of popular vote or not is absolutely irrelevant - don't bitch about the system after losing. Indeed, it's interesting how somehow Bush "stole" the election from Kerry in 2004, with the defenders endlessly pointing out minor discrepencies in Ohio, yet Bush significantly won the popular vote (over much wider of a margin that Gore in 2000). Would the Democrats have ceded if they won Ohio, rather than dare to have an "unelected" president?

It's entirely partisan. It's a bit of word play that comes across as petty and sore. Personally I think Bush is a terrible leader that has a lot of blood on his hands, and is very rapidly leading the US to bankruptcy, but I don't see the value of the Bush bashing in that essay.
Permalink Dennis Forbes 
March 17th, 2005
Muppet, as far as I can ascertain, Bush did get the majority of electoral votes in each of the elections.

You can make the argument that he gained some of those electoral votes unfairly, or that he did not win the popular election, but neither of those make him 'unelected'.

So, do you have access to data that shows differently, or are you merely ignorant of the US electoral process?
Permalink Steve Barbour 
March 17th, 2005
The 2000 election was utterly flubbed, and everyone knows it. There's a great deal of speculation and a decent body of evidence that rampant voter fraud occured in Florida, miscounts, etc, and that a straight race would have seen Gore in office. This is the basis for "unelected"

As it's been 5 years, I don't have arguments and sources ready-to-hand.
Permalink muppet 
March 17th, 2005
Dennis beat me to it. :-)
Permalink Steve Barbour 
March 17th, 2005
So you were talking out of your butt when you said "There's nothing partisan about that, it's verifiable."? If it's verifiable, then verify it.

Otherwise get back to your underwood and get chapter 14 knocked out.
Permalink Steve Barbour 
March 17th, 2005
"The 2000 election was utterly flubbed, and everyone knows it."

IMHO, the 2000 election was exactly like every election that predated it. However, due to an exceptionally close race, a massive media fuckup, and some other synchronicities, the existing problems with the system were called into sharp relief.

The biggest problem with the 2000 election is that the closeness of the race made the process an excellent scapegoat for sore losers. [Note: I am NOT saying Democrats are sore losers; I'm saying that for those who tend to be sore losers, the election process gave them a wonderful target]

I actually know a few Democrats who are annoyed Gore lost, but grant that that's the way the system works, let's accept it and move on. I find them to be generally more mature in other ways, as well.

Philo
Permalink Philo 
March 17th, 2005
"It's more mature not to question corruption and outright scandal in our political process." - Philo
Permalink muppet 
March 17th, 2005
Actually, I'm always puzzled why people attack Bush for being unelected in 2000. It's one of the few things you can't hold him responsible for.
Permalink Stephen Jones 
March 17th, 2005
muppet, if you want to question the entire system *as exemplified by the 2000 election*, that's a valid argument. But let's be sure to include things like Gore suing to discount absentee ballots and various other frauds that both sides have pursued.

But when you try to say *only* the 2000 election had problems (which is how I generally read comments like yours) then I see it as partisan bickering and sour grapes: "The 2000 election sucked because we lost"

I hate to say it, but the person whose tactics I approve of most in the 2004 election was Michael Moore - he was positive and proactive in trying to get college kids to vote.

Philo
Permalink Philo 
March 17th, 2005
Oh no, I agree with you Philo, I think the entire process is broken. Admittedly, it's particularly frustrating when an ass like Bush wins.
Permalink muppet 
March 17th, 2005
---" - he was positive and proactive in trying to get college kids to vote. "----

And the Republicans tried to get him jailed for it.

Actually as far as one can tell 2004 was even more corrupt than 2000 but in this case it didn't affect the outcome so clearly.
Permalink Stephen Jones 
March 17th, 2005
Thanks a bunch for "The Rebel Sell", Mark. I read it some time ago and I wished that I had bookmarked it.

About the first essay, I also think it's a pity that he drew politics into it. If he had left that last bit out the essay would have been a wonderful piece in itself.
Permalink Peter Monsson 
March 17th, 2005
From the article: "And their victim, to some extent, though my capacity for sloth, my belief in it, may yet save me, Like some stub­born heretic in fifth-century Rome, still offering gifts to the spirit of the fields even as the priests sniff about the tempa for sin, I daily sacrifice my bit of time."

Anyone else read that a couple of times trying to figure out what it was saying, then decide it wasn't worth it? The comma quota is long since cashed, buddy.
Permalink Tail of the "g" 
March 17th, 2005
Listen to the, refutable, not nary a word, Speak to me now. Because, therefore, it is non.
Permalink Dennis Forbes 
March 17th, 2005
Back on topic after extensive beating around the busk :-)

For a prescient essay on consumerism and raison d'etre try Pohl and Kornbluth's "The Space Merchants"

http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/ASIN/0312749511/102-0498074-6868928

Every home should have one ...
Permalink trollop 
March 17th, 2005
Bah. busk -> bush

I'll be reduced to busking if I don't improve my typing, but what could I play?
Permalink trollop 
March 17th, 2005
Be honest. Bush was, in 2000, appointed by the court.
Permalink  
March 18th, 2005

This topic was orginally posted to the off-topic forum of the
Joel on Software discussion board.

Other topics: March, 2005 Other topics: March, 2005 Recent topics Recent topics