Everytime You Vote 3rd Party, God Shaves a Kitten

By -

My owner voted for Nader and look what happened to me!

Comments

SlappyCat said…
This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.
10:36 AM
SlappyCat said…
I am not anti-third party. On the contrary, I would like to see changes to the electoral system where the Congress is apportioned by the number of votes each party receives. Say, for example the Green party gets 2% of the vote nationally. Two percent of the seats in the House of Representatives would go to the Green party. How would this affect the national political race? Well, instead of the “all or nothing” system of collecting Electoral College votes, the votes would be apportioned by candidate. In the end, the candidate with the most Electoral votes wins, but the “third party” candidates and their parties would win house seats according to percentage of the electoral votes they received.

Then we could all love Nader or David Cobb (Green Party) or Marilyn Chambers (Personal Choice Part) or whomever.
10:44 AM
Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Those who control the language govern the sphere of debate.

By -
I came across an interesting “euphemism” if this is the correct word for it. The U.S. Forces in Iraq refer to insurgents as “anti Iraqi forces”. Considering that US soldiers in Iraq have killed far more Iraqis than insurgents have, it seems that US forces are more anti-Iraqi than the insurgents. Language is not a transparent medium for representing reality, but rather a cultural system that shapes our values and beliefs. As the US certainly has the upper hand in Iraq, we are in a position to write their history in any manner we see fit. The language we use to describe present history in Iraq will influence how present and future generations perceive the US war on Iraq. Let us please, please hope that the term “anti Iraqi forces” as defined by the US military does not replace “insurgent” in the US media’s reporting of the events in Iraq.
Read more

Gonzales Questions Habeas Corpus

By -
In the most shockingly cynical, mis-directed and mind-boggling statement by an Attorney General in perhaps the history of the world, Gonzales offered his own feeble-minded re-interpretation of the United States Constitution. In an further attempt to somehow justify the criminal activities of the Bush Administration, Gonzales stated, "There is no expressed grant of habeas in the Constitution; there’s a prohibition against taking it away,". So in order to take it away, does not one have to have it in the first place? My god, where did Bush find this guy? Answer: the same pea pod of neocons who are bent on taking away the rights of the US people, imposing imperial rule on the United States and expanding US hegemony to the rest of the world. It may be time to dust off those Hitler references.
Read more

Homophobic Alabama Politician Parlays Hate Mongering, Censorship into Political Career

By -
Last week I posted a link to a story about an homophobic Alabama republican who introduced legislation to ban funding to schools and libraries that make available material that portray homosexuality in any light other than hateful. According to this article in The Guardian; For Bush, when it comes to censorship and leading the charge against “the homosexual agenda”, Gerald Allen, Republican, Alabama State Legislature, is just the man for the job. “Earlier this week, Allen got a call from Washington. He will be meeting with President Bush on Monday. I asked him if this was his first invitation to the White House. "Oh no," he laughs. "It's my fifth meeting with Mr. Bush." Bush is interested in Allen's opinions because Allen is an elected Republican representative in the Alabama state legislature. He is Bush's base. Last week, Bush's base introduced a bill that would ban the use of state funds to purchase any books or other materials that &q
Read more