![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
Sigh...Politics & Fray...which are not related, even though it sounds like they are
Before I begin my rant diatribe post on poltics, on a positive note - I started reading Joss Whedon and Karl Moline's Fray series last night and am enjoying it, amazingly enough. Decided to give it another crack, since it has occurred to me that the Buffy comics aren't going to make much sense if I don't read it. You really do have to be in the right frame of mind to enjoy it - or in the right mood. The last two times I'd tried to read it - it turned me off for some reason, this round, however, I'm engrossed. Almost done in fact, just about forty pages to go or thereabouts. If you're interested, it does hammer home Whedon's origin tale of how slayers and vampires were created and what they are. In an odd way they are kindred - the slayer is a girl infected by a demon, vampires are humans that have been infected by demons. The difference? For the slayer, the demon just gives her its strength, she controls everything else. For the vampires, the human provides the demon with a shell and a personality or emotional baggage/purpose, which the demon twists to meet it's own ideal. Will state that the vampires - Icarus and Harth sound a lot like Angel and Spike or rather their dialogue reminds me of them. Ukron - looks like Giles when he was turned into a Fyarl demon in Season 4 and sort of sounds like Giles. Melaka, however, doesn't sound like anyone. I think Whedon loved the Buffy/Dawn - Big Sister raising Little Sister Dynamic - so much that he more or less does the same thing here. At any rate it's proving to be a fun and informative read regarding certain items. Not sure how well the Buffy comics fit with it though. Feels a lot like Whedon is struggling to fit all his characters in some sort of end-game, which leads to the Fray Universe and I'm not completely sure it is working or rather that his characters actions realistically would lead to it. At times, I feel as if the plot is at the expense of the characters as opposed to coming directly from them, like some big god moving pawns across a chess-board, which granted writers often do. That said? I'm loving Fray, so maybe the Buffy comics will surprise me as well?
Okay not as brief as I intended.
I am not currently watching the Democratic Convention, mostly because politics is giving me a headache at the moment and as far as I can tell Comedy Central does not appear to be covering it - dang-it! November really can't come fast enough. I've no clue what these people are going to do come November. At this point, there's a 50/50 chance McCain or Obama will win. I do know Hillary isn't going to be President, despite what her deluded supporters may think.
The HillaryNitwits Supporters make no sense to me whatesover. In the paper this morning, a 61 year old woman in New Jersey who runs the organization PUMA (not to be confused with the word Cougar either as the animal or well, you know), stated "they can't keep us middle-aged women back! We'll support Hillary. She'll become President! Our voices will be heard!"
Ah.Okay.
I repeated this quote to a 62 year friend who stated: "WHAT? I am not middle-aged! I do not plan to live to be 112!"
First off, I hate to be the one to inform you of this, but unless you plan to live to be 112, at the age of 61, you are NO LONGER middle-aged. 60 is not the new 50 - no matter how many times you like to repeat it while you run on your treadmill. Second, Hillary lost the primary election, she ain't becoming President, that ship has long sailed, the majority of the delegates picked Obama. Plus, she caved. Gave a nice little speech and everything. Deal with it.
"So I'll vote McCain!" They scream like a bunch of bratty four year olds, no disrepect meant towards actual four year olds, who are beginning to look brighter and more adult than the Hillary Supporters by the minute. This begs the question why did they support Hillary to begin with?
Clearly it wasn't for her health care plan or the economy, or about the environment or for that matter the endless war in Iraq. Because hello, McCain had the exact opposite point of view, while Obama completely agreed with Clinton. Was it that they are afraid Israel will get blown up? If so, maybe these people should defect to Israel, since clearly they care more about Israel than the US, which the last time I checked is the country that is holding this election and will be the one that the President will be governing. Not, ah-hem, Israel. Last I checked, Israel has its own governing problems, not to mention foreign policy issues. If it gets blown up it will not be the fault of the US. Israel doesn't need anyone's help in that department, trust me. It can survive quite well regardless of who we vote for. OR is it because, they wanted a woman in the white house? So, wait, you've decided if you can't have a woman in the White House, you'd rather have an old conservative White Guy? Personally, I think voting for someone for the President of a country based solely on their race, gender, religion or sexual orientation is akin to well, troll logic. It is just plain stupid. OR wait, is it, can it be..because OBAMA has genuine charisma like gasp Hitler?? Sigh. Guys, most movie stars have that type of Charisma. Arnold Schwazzerneggor has that type of charisma. Ronald Regan certainly had it, as did Bill Clinton and PRincess Diana. Were they like Hitler? I don't think so. Bush - who doesn't appear to have any charisma, on the other hand, has probably done the most facist things the US has seen in its entire history. Like, I don't know the Patriote Act, the wire-tapping, the detainee/exportation, the rally for the constitutional amendement against same-sex marriage...if you don't think that's like Hitler, you need to read up on the Third Reich. This is also troll logic, or pure emotion and nothing to do with logic. People...can be frustratingly dense when it comes to important things like Presidential elections - how else do you explain eight years of Bush?
Sigh.
I don't understand these people.
With any luck, Hillary Clinton will redeem herself and give a speech tomorrow night that rallies and inspires her supporters to back Obama and Biden. I'm not holding my breath.
The Clintons and their supporters (the ones still supporting them and refuse to let go - just so we're clear) have proven themselves to be out of touch with what is needed to change things.
My father told me the other night that he'd read an article in NEW YORK MAGAZINE that details OBAMA's economic vision and how out of touch the Old School Democrats are. He said that they can't wrap their brains around the fact that we need to move past "ideologies" and "narrow convictions" - we need to use aspects from each ideology, combine the good bits from reganomics, socialism, Clintonism, right-wing privatization or Captialism gone insane to from a new model since the old one isn't working. Adding, that the new generation, ie. my generation or us 35-50 year olds, the post Baby-Boomers, had grown sick of the ideologies and realized that a central method made more sense. They needed to step in and clean up the mess the others had made and move the country ahead in a different direction.
In short, we have to grow up and get past our ideologies, nationalism, jingoism, and tribal/ethnic/gender/race allegiances. This is a globabl marketplace, folks, like it or not everything we do affects one another. We no longer can live in an isolated bubble. The inability to see this is due partly to the generation gap, the babyboomers don't see it - they are holding on to the old ways, while the next generation - generation x, does see it and has become fed up with the old ideologies.
Fascinating perspective and very true. I'm so sick and tired of the terms liberal and conservative, left and right. What we need is something in between the extremes. The extreme never works - all that happens in the long run is the pendulum keeps sweeping back and forth.
Over and over. It's time we balanced things and moved towards the middle.
Okay not as brief as I intended.
I am not currently watching the Democratic Convention, mostly because politics is giving me a headache at the moment and as far as I can tell Comedy Central does not appear to be covering it - dang-it! November really can't come fast enough. I've no clue what these people are going to do come November. At this point, there's a 50/50 chance McCain or Obama will win. I do know Hillary isn't going to be President, despite what her deluded supporters may think.
The Hillary
Ah.Okay.
I repeated this quote to a 62 year friend who stated: "WHAT? I am not middle-aged! I do not plan to live to be 112!"
First off, I hate to be the one to inform you of this, but unless you plan to live to be 112, at the age of 61, you are NO LONGER middle-aged. 60 is not the new 50 - no matter how many times you like to repeat it while you run on your treadmill. Second, Hillary lost the primary election, she ain't becoming President, that ship has long sailed, the majority of the delegates picked Obama. Plus, she caved. Gave a nice little speech and everything. Deal with it.
"So I'll vote McCain!" They scream like a bunch of bratty four year olds, no disrepect meant towards actual four year olds, who are beginning to look brighter and more adult than the Hillary Supporters by the minute. This begs the question why did they support Hillary to begin with?
Clearly it wasn't for her health care plan or the economy, or about the environment or for that matter the endless war in Iraq. Because hello, McCain had the exact opposite point of view, while Obama completely agreed with Clinton. Was it that they are afraid Israel will get blown up? If so, maybe these people should defect to Israel, since clearly they care more about Israel than the US, which the last time I checked is the country that is holding this election and will be the one that the President will be governing. Not, ah-hem, Israel. Last I checked, Israel has its own governing problems, not to mention foreign policy issues. If it gets blown up it will not be the fault of the US. Israel doesn't need anyone's help in that department, trust me. It can survive quite well regardless of who we vote for. OR is it because, they wanted a woman in the white house? So, wait, you've decided if you can't have a woman in the White House, you'd rather have an old conservative White Guy? Personally, I think voting for someone for the President of a country based solely on their race, gender, religion or sexual orientation is akin to well, troll logic. It is just plain stupid. OR wait, is it, can it be..because OBAMA has genuine charisma like gasp Hitler?? Sigh. Guys, most movie stars have that type of Charisma. Arnold Schwazzerneggor has that type of charisma. Ronald Regan certainly had it, as did Bill Clinton and PRincess Diana. Were they like Hitler? I don't think so. Bush - who doesn't appear to have any charisma, on the other hand, has probably done the most facist things the US has seen in its entire history. Like, I don't know the Patriote Act, the wire-tapping, the detainee/exportation, the rally for the constitutional amendement against same-sex marriage...if you don't think that's like Hitler, you need to read up on the Third Reich. This is also troll logic, or pure emotion and nothing to do with logic. People...can be frustratingly dense when it comes to important things like Presidential elections - how else do you explain eight years of Bush?
Sigh.
I don't understand these people.
With any luck, Hillary Clinton will redeem herself and give a speech tomorrow night that rallies and inspires her supporters to back Obama and Biden. I'm not holding my breath.
The Clintons and their supporters (the ones still supporting them and refuse to let go - just so we're clear) have proven themselves to be out of touch with what is needed to change things.
My father told me the other night that he'd read an article in NEW YORK MAGAZINE that details OBAMA's economic vision and how out of touch the Old School Democrats are. He said that they can't wrap their brains around the fact that we need to move past "ideologies" and "narrow convictions" - we need to use aspects from each ideology, combine the good bits from reganomics, socialism, Clintonism, right-wing privatization or Captialism gone insane to from a new model since the old one isn't working. Adding, that the new generation, ie. my generation or us 35-50 year olds, the post Baby-Boomers, had grown sick of the ideologies and realized that a central method made more sense. They needed to step in and clean up the mess the others had made and move the country ahead in a different direction.
In short, we have to grow up and get past our ideologies, nationalism, jingoism, and tribal/ethnic/gender/race allegiances. This is a globabl marketplace, folks, like it or not everything we do affects one another. We no longer can live in an isolated bubble. The inability to see this is due partly to the generation gap, the babyboomers don't see it - they are holding on to the old ways, while the next generation - generation x, does see it and has become fed up with the old ideologies.
Fascinating perspective and very true. I'm so sick and tired of the terms liberal and conservative, left and right. What we need is something in between the extremes. The extreme never works - all that happens in the long run is the pendulum keeps sweeping back and forth.
Over and over. It's time we balanced things and moved towards the middle.
no subject
Jon Stewart is in Denver and tomorrow night he'll be broadcasting from the Convention... and also tomorrow night Stephen Colbert will have new shows but he is still in NYC.
I've been watching the convention most of the day, mostly from CSpan because they don't have commentators! Michelle gave a lovely speech, and I can't imagine anyone not liking her after that speech. And of course it was very sweet to see Teddy Kennedy, who has clearly lost some hair, but he boomed out his short speech with surprising strength and conviction.
no subject
no subject
no subject
Sort of makes sense on a couple of levels, the media likes "drama" and "conflict" - by pushing the discord and contentiousness of Clinton's supporters - it creates news and drama. Which begs the question - has the media expanded beyond it's usefulness, to the extent that it must manufacture news in order
to keep busy? And to what degree if any can we trust any of the information that the media presents us? Poll numbers can be manipulated and to a degree manufactured to meet a specific point of view. If the primaries proved anything - the polls don't determine outcomes.
Meanwhile some not all of the news media blatantly ignored some of the huge human rights violations going on during the Olympics. Emphasizing Phelps medal wins or the pagentry, while ignoring other more major issues.
Maybe my fury is misdirected - it should be at the media?
no subject
In other words, what you said.