October precedes November, the month of voting, stabbing

So why don't I want to vote?

I have been veering away from politics over the course of the past few months. I am sufficiently knowledgable to know I am unknowledgable. So I will try to make this one of only a few this election season, the last two posts on the meaning of santorum notwithstanding. (They weren't about politics, they were about coherence models of truth theory! I have a degree in Philosophy!)

Here's a post from last October I wanted to drag back, and improve (which I did); the takeaway?

This voting season, republicans will make gains [happened], and it will be a beautiful thing. Not so much because I want a bunch of Republicans running things any more than I would want Democrats doing it, but because it's 2006 all over again. Basically, the tea party will appear to be some "grass roots" support group [happened and continues to happen]. They will throw around a flurry of unconsolidated, unfocused money to buy incoherent votes [happened and happening].

As a result, Republicans, like the MoveOn fueled dems from back in 2006, will have no idea how they are supposed to vote since neither party has any backbone.

2004, 2008 - White House, Congress controlled by same party; opposition party huddles in ideological recesses of wings, lavishing attention on apparently sympathizable minority of their party

2006, 2010 - Congress (Both, HoR) ceded to opposition thanks to efforts of "grass roots"

2007, 2011 - Becomes apparent that it was an overcorrection as "grass roots" (MoveOn, Tea Party) have neither practical nor ideological moral/political authority or coherence or basic salience [happened]

2008, [2012] - Public votes to scurry back to status quo

So what does that mean with 2011's November? I don't even know. Apparently there are something like 22 Issues on my State's ballot. I have no idea if they all apply to me. I am not looking forward to voting. There is nothing to want on the ballot.

How to care about voting: The last time I wanted to vote I did so and the theatre at the end of my street got a liquor license in addition to the beer license they already had.

That is Democracy at work.

How to not care about voting:SB5/Issue2? Can't say I care. And that is speaking as someone who would be impacted by it.

Either (A) we support an over-the-top reform or (B) we support an unsustainable system. I did not paint this false dilemma, intra-state politics did. Should everyone be concerned about their job and financial stability? Obviously.Should the efficacy of government be elevated beyond normal scopes of performance and politicized? Probably not, unless someone is just making points.

• Voter apathy aside, how else can I be expected to vote in a way that balances impacting me least in the short-term, and doesn't screw me in the long-term?
• Do the people who paint these policies do so with dilemmas deliberately so as to disenfranchise vested parties?
• If Ohio votes down/up SB5/Issue 2, and it really is the false dilemma I characterize it as, then should either side repudiate the other or act as though any mandate was handed down? How should up/down voters react to seeing this?

The answer to addressing not caring about voting lies in a proper de-conflating government and politics. Political advocacy is good for imaging generally, and in particular the framing of a debate; it's not actually good at actually being convincing as an argument. To compensate for that, advocacy goes the route of saturation to the point of indoctrination through memetics. (They run a bunch of adverts with three word takeaways that are supposed to embed themselves in your brain creating a microstructure they can build upon.)

An idea is like an image; when it is shrunk, then blown up, it loses resolution and becomes grainy around the edges. That is a problem for coherent arguments but not memes. Dithering along those edges allows the user to plank a platform and does not engender critique of interoperability or coherence of stack.

[How's that for a mixed metaphor? I think there's at least three in there. -mfg]

Memetic political advocacy traffics in compressed images, and transmits them to people without any kind of codec or other scaling logarithm; as a result wildly variant deviations of the message conjoin with other memetics in the users cache to create what passes for a person's political affiliation, but in reality is just simply a bias constructed of the most resonant, residual memes they picked up.

So what does that mean to you? Stab in the dark, it's all you got.

Olbermann to be replaced by Lewis Black (in 3 minute increments)?

at least thats how the vote went.

thanks all for participating.

My guess is he will first need to opine on the Hyde Amendment and the "No Taxpayer Funding for Abortion Act" (co-sponsored by 173) that seeks to enforce that rape isn't exactly rape all the time anymore since republicans have the purse strings. He'll have three minutes to set his ire and give us our marching orders.

 By the way ladies, the only rape that's really rape according to the GOP is hard time prison rape-style rape. Rapes that would no longer count as rape: statutory rape, date rape, drunk/drugged rape, unconscious rape, mentally retarded rape. Probably more but you get the picture.

Update on 3:51PM by mfg

oop, i spoke too soon on the GOP re-defining of rape. or rather re-defining the context in which rape qualifies someone for abortions. because not all people who get raped need to not bear their rapist's baby. but i digress, as those crazy dems are upping the ante and now almost everybody is getting raped!

just look:

zomG! im staying inside

whats in a name? Appropriations

 I am not a usual watcher of 360. but this was a nicely composed piece they put together.

its a criticism of Republican Congressman Hal Rogers (KY) pointing out a conflict between him wanting to get rid of ear marks, him getting $250,000,000 in ear marks (top 20%), and him being the head of the house Appropriations Committee. Congratulations to tea partying votes mattering.

All that said, does anyone actually care? If we ask corporations to regulate themselves, what is inconsistent with congressman regulating themselves? Basically, the comparison would be between voters and non-voting stock-holders, who turn in ballots anyway.

e pluribus unum

Randy Forbes up in 'dis!

that mean 'ol pr. hussein obama esquire is in deep diaper doodles with the national prayer caucus. they were unhappy he was on a 10-day trade mission that cost americans $900 billion over two years and said "e pluribus unum" was the national motto. now, whether you want to believe that is the case, or (as the prayer caucus would have) that  "in god we trust" is the national motto, the Boy Scouts will inform you that in fact they both are. That latin gargle of words from revolutionary times, and the "god" goodness from the civil war (when "Republican" was born, or rather shed its Whig?).

The question is, which is more perfect? Unfortunately (insofar as it casts us further as a god-less diaspora), it's the Latin one as it has 13 (coven-endorsed, pentagram fortified) letters. now, that matters to us like the stripes on the flag and makes it more coherent, remember how there were 13 colonies? unfortunately trusting god fetches only 12 letters and isn't a good source of mandrake stalk fiber and pixie meth magic. consequently Eisenhower made an error and spit on the founding fathers when he made some agit-prop move to endorse 'in gawd we trust' (did you see what I did there? I made it 13 letters!); may their turning in their deist graves not spin the pyramids in excess before the appointed time of the Alien arrival to fend off our Robot overlords.

Update on 12:09PM by mfg

oh. i almost forgot what else i needed more than chistmas and 2 weeks vacation: Julian Assange arrested and extradited to Joe Lieberman's closet of horrors for crimes involving letting people know that America can talk some shit and still be all happy face to you.

oldie goodie; in time for the elections!

before you dont go to the polling place, think about this gem:

back in 2005 wasn't it grand? man. i can't believe one person, myself, could ever have been so smug.

This voting season, republicans will make gains. and it will be a beautiful thing. Not so much becuse I want a bunch of Republicans running things any more than I would want Democrats doing it, but because it's 2006 all over again. Basically, the tea party will appear to be some "grass roots" support group. They will throw around a flurry of unconsolidated, unfocused money to buy incoherent votes.

As a result, Republicans, like the MoveOn fueled dems from back in 2006, will have no idea how they are supposed to vote since neither party has any backbone.

2004, 2008 - White House, Congress controlled by same party; opposition party huddles in ideological recesses of wings, lavishing attention on apparently sympathizable minority of their party

2006, 2010 - Congress ceded to opposition thanks to efforts of "grass roots"

2007, 2011 - Everyone realizes it was an overcorrection as "grass roots" have no moral/political authority or coherence/salience

2008, 2012 - Public votes to scurry back to status quo

play it again joe, the 20-oughts have to have the worst political choruses and we only have a few months left

orrin hatch being a man

so what is happening in the land of misbehaving politicians today? well, there was that contrived press conference of republicans' pledge to america. what a joke. here's to politicians getting bit in the ass by throwing in their lot with the grass roots. dear republicans, please reference moveon.org and the heart ache dems still assuage to this day. i guess you're neither smarter than dems in 2004, nor adept enough to wholly co-opt the tea partiers. perhaps it just means you are equally desperate as the DNC was back then. at least the dems had the excuse of dangling in the breeze for four, not just two years. perhaps you are too impatient to let the true fruit ripen. perhaps it will cost you in 2012. the delusionally self-importance of the anti war movement is today's delusionally self important anti government movement.