S Nelson's Blog
About the Author
One man you don`t catch with his pants down is a nudist.
It was a dark and stormy night....
A couple of hundred years ago, a bunch of guys had a crazy idea about starting a new kind of government that would be run by representatives chosen from among the common people. They thought that people should be free to live their own lives as they saw best, to make their own choices free from too much government control, to worship in whatever faith they believed - or none at all, and to have the opportunity to pursue whatever education and career the felt called to pursue.
We've improved very little on their original ideas. We've done some work to make sure that ALL people get those same freedoms, and to define and protect a few other things that weren't mentioned in the beginning..... but on the whole, we're their living legacy. And now we have a choice.
On the one hand, we - as a nation - can make the safe choice. We *could* elect an old soldier who will surround himself with people who are willing to chip away at our own freedoms and sacrifice the dreams of our people in order to "protect" us from undefinable dangers and fears. People who are willing to make our choices for us because they KNOW what is better for us, and also what is "right" for us. They know it's better to sacrifice a woman's life than to kill an unborn child. They know it's better to go to war to protect the country's interests than to pursue diplomacy. They know that marriage is between a man and a woman. They know that the more secure future lies in protecting the interests of huge corporations rather than in trusting average people. They seem to know a lot....
On the other hand, we could choose a young guy who is an unknown. We aren't sure who he'll surround himself with, but it's a safe bet they won't be anything like what we've seen before. They'll have *gasp* new ideas. They'll take us in *shudder* new directions. He actually has the audacity (wait for it....) to suggest that the one most powerful, and most important treasure that our heritage has given us is our hope. When my Great-great-great-grandfather stepped off the boat from Ireland as a poor teenage boy, that was ALL he had. The clothes on his back and the hope that in a free country he could build a life and a family. It worked. It turns out that was all he really needed to have. That and the courage needed to head off into an uncertain future and believe in yourself to find the way.
I pray that come November, America is STILL the land of the free, and the home of the brave.
A couple of hundred years ago, a bunch of guys had a crazy idea about starting a new kind of government that would be run by representatives chosen from among the common people. They thought that people should be free to live their own lives as they saw best, to make their own choices free from too much government control, to worship in whatever faith they believed - or none at all, and to have the opportunity to pursue whatever education and career the felt called to pursue.
We've improved very little on their original ideas. We've done some work to make sure that ALL people get those same freedoms, and to define and protect a few other things that weren't mentioned in the beginning..... but on the whole, we're their living legacy. And now we have a choice.
On the one hand, we - as a nation - can make the safe choice. We *could* elect an old soldier who will surround himself with people who are willing to chip away at our own freedoms and sacrifice the dreams of our people in order to "protect" us from undefinable dangers and fears. People who are willing to make our choices for us because they KNOW what is better for us, and also what is "right" for us. They know it's better to sacrifice a woman's life than to kill an unborn child. They know it's better to go to war to protect the country's interests than to pursue diplomacy. They know that marriage is between a man and a woman. They know that the more secure future lies in protecting the interests of huge corporations rather than in trusting average people. They seem to know a lot....
On the other hand, we could choose a young guy who is an unknown. We aren't sure who he'll surround himself with, but it's a safe bet they won't be anything like what we've seen before. They'll have *gasp* new ideas. They'll take us in *shudder* new directions. He actually has the audacity (wait for it....) to suggest that the one most powerful, and most important treasure that our heritage has given us is our hope. When my Great-great-great-grandfather stepped off the boat from Ireland as a poor teenage boy, that was ALL he had. The clothes on his back and the hope that in a free country he could build a life and a family. It worked. It turns out that was all he really needed to have. That and the courage needed to head off into an uncertain future and believe in yourself to find the way.
I pray that come November, America is STILL the land of the free, and the home of the brave.
As has been pointed out many times throught this presidential campaign season, polls are inaccurate. We get that. The reason that many people have blogged about going back to before the Iowa Caucus is that pollsters such as Rasmutten only dial land lines. So at best, the polls ONLY represent the opinions of randomly selected Americans who have land line telephones with listed numbers.
It's all well and good to point out that fact as a potential source of poll inaccuracy, but some go further to provide the demographics of people who are NOT being reached because of the land line issue, and to suggest that it is valid to correct the poll in a certain direction and by a certain amount - based on information NOT gathered.
I'm willing, for the sake of argument, because I have nothing better to do for the next 10 minutes, to assume that you can legitimately correct gathered information based on NON gathered information... I would STILL argue against a valid correction based on simply the land line error and nothing else. I'd say it's REALLY difficult to accurately poll people in Florida and Ohio who will become confused at the voting booth and vote for a can of beans for President, later claiming they couldn't understand the ballot. That's gotta be like, close to a 5% correction. I'd say it's pretty darned difficult to accurately correct for the the voting dead - Democrats who will vote in November despite being incorporeal. I expect they're planning to come out in numbers this year. I'd give that a 3% correction. And here's perhaps my favorite, I doubt if everyone answering pollsters are being 100% honest. Look, it's the age of telemarketers and other unsolicited phonecallers troubling us at the LEAST convenient times with things that "will only take a minute." There are people who will participate JUST for the opportunity of screwing with poll results as payback for the intrusion. I'd call that at least a 2% correction. Then there's a random, let's say... 5% correction needed for all the other possible errors that I didn't think of.
Let's work the math. I've heard people say 8% for the landlines, plus another 15% for the other things I mentioned.... multiply by 2 just cause it sounds good, and take the square root because I know how to do that too, and you come up with a number THAT MEANS NOTHING!!!
You can't adjust gathered information based on non gathered information.
It's all well and good to point out that fact as a potential source of poll inaccuracy, but some go further to provide the demographics of people who are NOT being reached because of the land line issue, and to suggest that it is valid to correct the poll in a certain direction and by a certain amount - based on information NOT gathered.
I'm willing, for the sake of argument, because I have nothing better to do for the next 10 minutes, to assume that you can legitimately correct gathered information based on NON gathered information... I would STILL argue against a valid correction based on simply the land line error and nothing else. I'd say it's REALLY difficult to accurately poll people in Florida and Ohio who will become confused at the voting booth and vote for a can of beans for President, later claiming they couldn't understand the ballot. That's gotta be like, close to a 5% correction. I'd say it's pretty darned difficult to accurately correct for the the voting dead - Democrats who will vote in November despite being incorporeal. I expect they're planning to come out in numbers this year. I'd give that a 3% correction. And here's perhaps my favorite, I doubt if everyone answering pollsters are being 100% honest. Look, it's the age of telemarketers and other unsolicited phonecallers troubling us at the LEAST convenient times with things that "will only take a minute." There are people who will participate JUST for the opportunity of screwing with poll results as payback for the intrusion. I'd call that at least a 2% correction. Then there's a random, let's say... 5% correction needed for all the other possible errors that I didn't think of.
Let's work the math. I've heard people say 8% for the landlines, plus another 15% for the other things I mentioned.... multiply by 2 just cause it sounds good, and take the square root because I know how to do that too, and you come up with a number THAT MEANS NOTHING!!!
You can't adjust gathered information based on non gathered information.
Sorry guys, but I couldn't help myself. The quote from the famous Highlander movie, "There can be only one", seems to be the understanding that some people have of the office of POTUS. Ready? Here it is. The President of the United States is simply a representative of the people. He or she is a member of a political party. The party has an ideology.
We need something much bigger than an individual in the White House come next year. Barack Obama cannot solve America's problems alone. No single individual can. No single individual has ever "run" this nation. The Democratic party is made up of a lot of people. And there are a lot of highly educated people near the top who are doing a lot of thinking about how to solve things. It is safe, I think, to assume that no matter which of our candidates had been our nominee, they would listening to Dr Dean, Al Gore, Bill Clinton, Jimmy Carter, Ted Kennedy - while he can still advise, John Edwards, Bill Richardson, Joe Biden, and many more. There may be one individual that occupies the position of POTUS, but make no mistake that the executive branch is still a TEAM EFFORT.
Compare the team I just mentioned to the current Republican Team: Bush, Cheney, Rove, Rumsfeld, Libby, Gonzales, Rehnquist, .... and of course, heckuva job Brownie...
George W Bush, while an epic failure in his own right, could not possibly have achieved so much fail in the last 8 years without a really great support system.
We need the entire support system that will stand in the background behind the Democratic nominee.
If you could only write one blog here, ever, OR If you were interested in this election because of only one thing (one issue) what thing would you choose?
Just a question out of curiosity. I imagine a lot of people will say the economy, some will say the war, and some will be wholly unable to answer the question, and will settle for rambling a bit about how rotten Republicans are.
Just a question out of curiosity. I imagine a lot of people will say the economy, some will say the war, and some will be wholly unable to answer the question, and will settle for rambling a bit about how rotten Republicans are.
get someone who isn't really interested in American politics to register to vote? In university creative writing class, we had an exercise in writing hooks. Each day we had to write an opening paragraph, and by the third sentence, we had to hook the reader. So.... how do you hook someone who is too busy with life to stop and worry about all this?
If there was no oil left, how long would you survive?
Write pro Obama posts on a pro Obama website?
Too easy. You can do that in your pajamas while you're getting drunk. That doesn't prove that you're willing to go the distance for a Democratic victory.
Give money?
Easy for those who have it to give.
Register voters? Do footwork on your real time in the real world?
Not bad. Now you're getting somewhere.
How about a real challenge, though. How about, are you willing to talk to people who do NOT support Senator Obama?
Are you willing to take on Republicans head to head - face to face? Are you willing to listen to their points, and have FAITH that your own points have more merit? Are you willing to let your own reasons stand up to a challenge?
Are you willing to LISTEN TO and DIALOGUE WITH the angry HRC supporters who havent come around? Or, is it simply more convenient to shut out anyone who opposes you?
Some who say that they would see a Democratic victory in November are only willing to work for that if it means they get to sit around in a group of like minded people who don't challenge them.
I'm willing to give a little more. I'm willing to work a little harder. I BELIEVE in the Democratic party. In all of it. I believe in Howard Dean, I believe in Donna Brazile, in Hillary Clinton, Bill Clinton, Jimmy Carter, Al Gore, I still believe in John Edwards... even though we now see his failures. I believe in US. And I am never afraid, NEVER, to listen - really and truly listen - to those who oppose my beliefs, because ONLY in doing that do I earn their respect, and do I earn my chance to share my beliefs with them.
I don't need to have it easy. I'm willing to take the hard road to get from here to the White House.
Too easy. You can do that in your pajamas while you're getting drunk. That doesn't prove that you're willing to go the distance for a Democratic victory.
Give money?
Easy for those who have it to give.
Register voters? Do footwork on your real time in the real world?
Not bad. Now you're getting somewhere.
How about a real challenge, though. How about, are you willing to talk to people who do NOT support Senator Obama?
Are you willing to take on Republicans head to head - face to face? Are you willing to listen to their points, and have FAITH that your own points have more merit? Are you willing to let your own reasons stand up to a challenge?
Are you willing to LISTEN TO and DIALOGUE WITH the angry HRC supporters who havent come around? Or, is it simply more convenient to shut out anyone who opposes you?
Some who say that they would see a Democratic victory in November are only willing to work for that if it means they get to sit around in a group of like minded people who don't challenge them.
I'm willing to give a little more. I'm willing to work a little harder. I BELIEVE in the Democratic party. In all of it. I believe in Howard Dean, I believe in Donna Brazile, in Hillary Clinton, Bill Clinton, Jimmy Carter, Al Gore, I still believe in John Edwards... even though we now see his failures. I believe in US. And I am never afraid, NEVER, to listen - really and truly listen - to those who oppose my beliefs, because ONLY in doing that do I earn their respect, and do I earn my chance to share my beliefs with them.
I don't need to have it easy. I'm willing to take the hard road to get from here to the White House.
Let's all take a sec and look around ourselves, and
see how much effect we're really having. I mean,
if all we're doing is blogging, that still matters, because
you might be influencing undecided voters who surf and
get to see some pro-Democratic Party posts. But you know,
this isn't all we could be doing. There's more than just a
message. There's action.
Arius is out registering voters today. Go Arius!
see how much effect we're really having. I mean,
if all we're doing is blogging, that still matters, because
you might be influencing undecided voters who surf and
get to see some pro-Democratic Party posts. But you know,
this isn't all we could be doing. There's more than just a
message. There's action.
Arius is out registering voters today. Go Arius!
Oh how I miss the good old days
of the presidential race,
I used to post my own ideas
with no one in my face.
We used to have some small respect
for fellow party members,
even when we disagreed....
I think Arius remembers.
But now those good old days are gone
the flames are being fanned.
By constant fighting day and night
and people getting canned.
The mod has swung his mighty axe
and bloggers' heads are rollin'
amid the cheers and victory cries
of Obamaphyles' extollin'
But it seems to me that there's a few
who live for pain and strife
and never miss a chance to fight...
c'mon guys - get a life.
of the presidential race,
I used to post my own ideas
with no one in my face.
We used to have some small respect
for fellow party members,
even when we disagreed....
I think Arius remembers.
But now those good old days are gone
the flames are being fanned.
By constant fighting day and night
and people getting canned.
The mod has swung his mighty axe
and bloggers' heads are rollin'
amid the cheers and victory cries
of Obamaphyles' extollin'
But it seems to me that there's a few
who live for pain and strife
and never miss a chance to fight...
c'mon guys - get a life.
On one of our new moderator's posts yesterday, I noticed a comment that suggested that because Rezko, rev Wright, and other things were Republican talking points, that we should not be allowed to discuss them here.
I'd like to address that as the admin and owner of the "Build the Party" group. "Build the Party" has about 70 members, many of whom have been very quiet recently given the atmosphere here. But the group was created long ago because this IS party builder, I am dedicated, as are all the members of that group, to using this site to promote the Democratic party and help secure a victory for our nominee. "Build the Party" members have always sought to defuse the fighting here on the site, and promote working together.
Now, speaking as a person who has ever worked toward the goal of Party Building, I feel that suggestion about Republican talking points is a poorly thought out, and frankly bizarre extension of censorship over the material that appears on this blog. The recent purge of several members who were working against the party from within may have been necessary from the moderator's point of view, however, I would caution all of us. We, as a blog community, now have both feet on a very slippery slope. Let's NOT rush to create a "book burning" list of things we're not allowed to talk about... and here's why:
Consider some voter who has never been active in politics. He or she is undecided and thinking about maybe voting this time around. He or she is surfing the net for information. On the RNC blogs, that undecided voter will read the talking points against Senator Obama. They will read about Rezko's connection, they will read about Rev Wright, ... they'll see a link to the "God damn America" soundbite.... we KNOW what undecided voters will be fed on a conservative blog. So then suppose that voter comes here to see what we have to say. Do we censor ourselves out of posting discussions that offer rebuttals to those talking points? Given the opportunity, I can, or Liz could, or Kathleen could completely take apart the Rev. Wright issue, so that any undecided voter would immediately see the Republican spin machine for the idiotic propaganda that it is. However, if that topic is off limits to us, as was suggested in the comment on Matt's post, then we can offer no discussion and no rebuttal to their talking points.
Your call, democrats.
I'd like to address that as the admin and owner of the "Build the Party" group. "Build the Party" has about 70 members, many of whom have been very quiet recently given the atmosphere here. But the group was created long ago because this IS party builder, I am dedicated, as are all the members of that group, to using this site to promote the Democratic party and help secure a victory for our nominee. "Build the Party" members have always sought to defuse the fighting here on the site, and promote working together.
Now, speaking as a person who has ever worked toward the goal of Party Building, I feel that suggestion about Republican talking points is a poorly thought out, and frankly bizarre extension of censorship over the material that appears on this blog. The recent purge of several members who were working against the party from within may have been necessary from the moderator's point of view, however, I would caution all of us. We, as a blog community, now have both feet on a very slippery slope. Let's NOT rush to create a "book burning" list of things we're not allowed to talk about... and here's why:
Consider some voter who has never been active in politics. He or she is undecided and thinking about maybe voting this time around. He or she is surfing the net for information. On the RNC blogs, that undecided voter will read the talking points against Senator Obama. They will read about Rezko's connection, they will read about Rev Wright, ... they'll see a link to the "God damn America" soundbite.... we KNOW what undecided voters will be fed on a conservative blog. So then suppose that voter comes here to see what we have to say. Do we censor ourselves out of posting discussions that offer rebuttals to those talking points? Given the opportunity, I can, or Liz could, or Kathleen could completely take apart the Rev. Wright issue, so that any undecided voter would immediately see the Republican spin machine for the idiotic propaganda that it is. However, if that topic is off limits to us, as was suggested in the comment on Matt's post, then we can offer no discussion and no rebuttal to their talking points.
Your call, democrats.
His account is banned now. I know that will make a lot of Obama supporters happy. He won't be back, he says. He's not going to blog under any other name besides his own handle. I'm just passing along a message. He said tell Paul and Jack and Mel "ciao" for him. That's about it.
I hope that the justice that met with TB meets with everyone else who deserves it.
I hope that the justice that met with TB meets with everyone else who deserves it.
Don't you get tired from all the fighting?
Doesn't it bring you down after a while?
I'm so tired.
I lost a friend today. One that I thought I'd have forever. I should be in bed crying, instead of sitting here staring at more fights on Partybuilder through the tears. But here I am.....
Don't you ever just want peace? Doesn't it make your head hurt, and sometimes even make your stomach hurt or your chest hurt? How does everyone keep up with the anger that's needed to go on fighting and fighting day after day? Like, dont you need to take a break and re-energize sometimes?
I want things to change for the better for everyone too... but right now I just wanna go to sleep for a really long time.
Doesn't it bring you down after a while?
I'm so tired.
I lost a friend today. One that I thought I'd have forever. I should be in bed crying, instead of sitting here staring at more fights on Partybuilder through the tears. But here I am.....
Don't you ever just want peace? Doesn't it make your head hurt, and sometimes even make your stomach hurt or your chest hurt? How does everyone keep up with the anger that's needed to go on fighting and fighting day after day? Like, dont you need to take a break and re-energize sometimes?
I want things to change for the better for everyone too... but right now I just wanna go to sleep for a really long time.
Not that this is really an issue for Democrats to talk about... but there's enough people throwing it out there these days...
Let's do it.
Who you gonna run on a third party? On what platform? and with what chance of success?
Serious discussion time.
Let's do it.
Who you gonna run on a third party? On what platform? and with what chance of success?
Serious discussion time.
Okay, am I going to apologize for something I had no control over? No. I do not carry the burden of guilt for that. Besides, my family paid in blood with Southern men who volunteered to fight for the Union because slavery was wrong. So - apologize? No. And to whom? I could go down to TN and go find an old slave cemetery and apologize to some rock markers in the ground, but I don't think that's what you want.
It gets tricky trying to extract a heartfelt apology from people more than 100 years removed from the thing they're supposed to apologize for.
HOWEVER, Read More »
It gets tricky trying to extract a heartfelt apology from people more than 100 years removed from the thing they're supposed to apologize for.
HOWEVER, Read More »
See LPD's post below for info on the challenge.
Since I am of neutral mind and not opposed to any of the Democratic candidates, I will be writing a number of heartfelt, sincere, and original posts praising Senator Obama, and the same for Senator Clinton. Anyone who wants something nice to say about one of them for the CHALLENGE, can email me, and for a $5 donation to MY favorite charity, I'll send you something positive to post.
Thanks, and have a great challenge.
Since I am of neutral mind and not opposed to any of the Democratic candidates, I will be writing a number of heartfelt, sincere, and original posts praising Senator Obama, and the same for Senator Clinton. Anyone who wants something nice to say about one of them for the CHALLENGE, can email me, and for a $5 donation to MY favorite charity, I'll send you something positive to post.
Thanks, and have a great challenge.
Welcome to GAFFEWATCH 2008!
God forbid that anyone who has been campaigning for 12 months now day in and day out speaking to people and doing interviews should fuck up a response to a question.
I'm gonna go completely rogue here, and suggest that this doesn't really impress me in the least as an actual reason why people shouldn't vote for McCain.
Here ARE a few: Read More »
God forbid that anyone who has been campaigning for 12 months now day in and day out speaking to people and doing interviews should fuck up a response to a question.
I'm gonna go completely rogue here, and suggest that this doesn't really impress me in the least as an actual reason why people shouldn't vote for McCain.
Here ARE a few: Read More »
Obviously, the system is not working the way we'd all like for it to.
I have some personal experience in the system. After my divorce, I wanted to go back and finish my incomplete university degree. I had two small children, no child support, and a low income. To my thinking, someone in that position should have been the welfare system's Golden Child. Working, with 3 years of university already passed, just needing 3 more semesters to complete a degree.... obviously not a habitual welfare recipient.
But what I found was that I had to fight, argue, appeal, struggle, beg and humiliate myself in order to get the assistance that was absolutely necessary if I was going to improve things for myself and my kids. Anyone with less then EXTREME determination would have been deterred by the red tape and the discouraging amount of time that has to be spent literally begging and justifying yourself. It would have been much more simple to give up hope and accept a life of low income unskilled labor and live in low income housing and raise kids with no aspirations.
But that's just one example. The system is broken.
What do we do?
I have some personal experience in the system. After my divorce, I wanted to go back and finish my incomplete university degree. I had two small children, no child support, and a low income. To my thinking, someone in that position should have been the welfare system's Golden Child. Working, with 3 years of university already passed, just needing 3 more semesters to complete a degree.... obviously not a habitual welfare recipient.
But what I found was that I had to fight, argue, appeal, struggle, beg and humiliate myself in order to get the assistance that was absolutely necessary if I was going to improve things for myself and my kids. Anyone with less then EXTREME determination would have been deterred by the red tape and the discouraging amount of time that has to be spent literally begging and justifying yourself. It would have been much more simple to give up hope and accept a life of low income unskilled labor and live in low income housing and raise kids with no aspirations.
But that's just one example. The system is broken.
What do we do?
Posts By Month
Posts