Journaling on estrip is easy and free. sign up here

Joshua's Journal

joshua
My Podcast Link

08/22/2006 22:32 #24664

Junk Mail
Greetings from Columbus, MS. Its 85 and humid at 10:31pm CST. The emotional weather is content with a few sprinkles of paranoia (speeding on the highway again) with a 60% chance of a stormy mood tomorrow afternoon (5 hour drive after work).

Its rare that I'm amused by the junk mail in my inbox. Who doesn't hate the random bullshit that some unsavory types want to send?

Lets see...

Someone with the e-mail address swshafer@maxwell.syr.edu sent me a Washington Post article. I don't know who you are, but thanks! I still remain the only (e:strip)per who has been linked from the Post's site.

Someone named "Wet Wendy" sent me something about wanting to "HookUp 4Sexx" (sic)

Apparently JetBlue is my "ticket to the Buffalo Bills" this season. Not that I wasn't sitting in the club section last Friday or anything.

Someone wants to send me a $100 soda gift card. WTF - If my teeth are ever going to rot out of my mouth I'd prefer it to be later rather than sooner.

Ken Mehlman, RNC Chair, loves to send out mass mails about once a week.

The Wet Wendy thing made me laugh anyway.


mrmike - 08/22/06 23:15
You should have stopped by to say high. I'm moonlighting for the Bills and was patroling near the end zone suites

08/17/2006 10:01 #24662

"Joementum"
It looks like the previous poll was correct (although the previous one covered all registered voters and the current one covered "likely" voters) - Lieberman still leads in the polls 49% to 38% as an independant, with the Republican challenger sporting a solid 4% (ha). -

So much for all the contrived feel-good, nation-changing rhetoric the Democrats were soaked in only a week ago. This one is a loser for the DNC - if I were a registered Democrat I would concentrate elsewhere. If the Democrats are looking to pick up seats in the Senate there are easier and better places to spend the campaign funds.

Its interesting to me that it was characterized as "democracy in action" during the primary - do you suppose that the liberals that were gloating this last week are saying it now, and will say it again in November? Democracy must only work when you win. Of course, nobody actually won anything , but whatever - Democrats ate one of their own and are pushing further to the left. A continued trend since 1972. Liberals registering 20,000 new Democratic voters in CT in order to skew the traditional Democratic voter base apparently isn't going to have the desired effect its engineers thought it might.
carolinian - 08/17/06 20:28
Lately I've felt like the only thing that either extreme polarization of the political spectrum hates more than the other extreme are people who find both merit and fault in what both sides are saying.

I think that there's definately a voter base in people like myself who feel alienated by both groups, and perhaps Lieberman is tapping into that.
uncutsaniflush - 08/17/06 18:29
By geez, I's the b'y who thinkin' "Dewey Beats Truman" when I read 'bout polls.

What a hoser, eh?

08/15/2006 14:07 #24661

Zobar
(e:Zobar) -

Whoever did the iPod versions of the 2006 Artvoice menus - thanks! That is a simple but great idea. I slapped those bad boys on my G5 30GB black bundle of joy yesterday, and now wherever I am, if I need some restaurant advice on the fly... there I am!

Thanks again, to whoever set that up. I hope to see that feature stick around in the future. Look at me, thanking Artvoice! Ha. You guys aren't so bad after all. Just keep getting Niman his meds and we'll be okay.

- Josh
joshua - 08/15/06 16:32
No Niman? Any particular reason? I'm super curious. If you don't want to publicize this thing then you can email me - jjlarson@hotmail.com

I was lucky enough to be able to spend two weeks in Washington state at the beginning of the year. The Seattle area has two or three weekly rags like Artvoice, and one difference I noticed was that they take more of an activist approach than Artvoice does... which is actually refreshing. It figures that the land of Microsoft thought of the iPod thing first!

Anyhow, keep up the innovative work. Jay was impressed by the page.
zobar - 08/15/06 15:41
:-D

That was me, and it's totally my favorite feature. The idea wasn't my own, though; I bogarted it from Seattle Weekly.

As for Niman, well ... I don't think he's going to be in the paper for a little while.

- Z

08/09/2006 16:27 #24660

Dinner
One thing that you wouldn't realize if you werent me and lucky (or unlucky depending on the mood) enough to travel all over the country every week is the absolute wealth of latino people in rural areas. Its obviously no coincidence that these pockets of latino population are near manufacturing jobs, but the best part of this is being able to sample the absolutely authentic Mexican joints that sprout up in these rural areas. I like to take parts of my trips home with me, whether it be a t-shirt, or a picture... or a recipe.

I've been known to bust out and cook for friends on occasion and have even inspired friends to dash out on their own and make a recipe - my boy Jerry makes a killer, killer chili for example. I don't know why I haven't really been inspired lately, but I stumbled upon a quesadilla recipe that I'm going to convert into soft tacos, teamed up with a smoky guacamole made with chipotle peppers in adobo.

Cooking for me is about the same things that playing a musical instrument is about - its about the creativity, of finishing something you start and not just enjoying the final product but attempting to excel at it.

Anyhow, about the food. I need *the* definitive produce section in Buffalo. The Co-Op's produce, hate to say it, is abysmal. I've actually been to some of the fruit processors that they supply from, and I know for a fact that they shelve fruit at the Co-Op that the producers themselves would not consider prime fruit by any stretch. So, that leaves me with Weg, the Farmer's Market and Guercio's. Where do I buy my produce here? Weg is particularly strong and I am aware of their extremely tight produce standards but Guercio's based on reputation alone seems to be an excellent choice.


ladycroft - 08/15/06 14:19
ditto - it's the place to go! we get all our produce there.
leetee - 08/09/06 21:12
Guercio's is indeed an excellent choice. The produce is the best i have seen in the city. Good prices, too. (E:Nejifer) is right, tho. Hours suck compared to other places. But hey, it's a family place and i totally respect them wanting to have nights off.
nejifer - 08/09/06 18:18
Grecio's is by far the best. Best prices and best quality, although the hours really suck. I think they're only open til 6 during the week and are closed on Sundays.

08/19/2006 17:41 #24663

To Answer Dcoffee
Category: politics
Since you referenced my post I figure I should post and possibly give you some answers.

Why are some Republicans supporting Lieberman? In order to understand this its important to know a little bit about the political climate in CT, although any national money coming from Republicans is a separate issue, which I'll highlight on. The R candidate in CT is not a viable candidate, and the Republicans in CT do not want him to run. He has been asked to resign his candidacy but he refuses. The truth is, liberal Republicans and conservative Democrats aren't much different, which is why in the northeast Lieberman is an alluring candidate as an Independant in comparison to Schlesinger. On the topic of the national party in relation to Lieberman, the national R's would support Lieberman minimally if at all, as outside of the Iraq war he has a liberal voting record, which frankly many lefties are refusing to acknowledge because of their blind rage over what the government is doing with the war and Lieberman's support of it. The only pleasure any Republicans are taking out of this is that Lamont is seen as a candidate propped by liberal 527 organizations and any kind of a defeat of a candidate like that is good news in their eyes. Plus, its important to note that if Lieberman was NOT an independant candidate this time around he wouldn't be getting any support from Republicans whatsoever. The fact that Lieberman is technically an "independant" frees Republicans from any so-called "voters guilt" over voting for or supporting Lieberman.

As for your comments about the 2-party system - in general I agree that the 2-party system isn't the best one out there. Stifling choices is a detriment to democracy. However, having multiple parties to choose from ends up completely making a mess of government. Take a look at Europe - Germany in particular, because this just happened recently there. When a party in most European nations do not get 51% of the vote in general elections, coalition governments have to be worked out... which is a worse situation than what we have currently because nothing EVER gets done in governments that are constantly politically gridlocked. Without a clear and established majority, you have chaos in government at worst and status quo at best. This is why, although our system isn't perfect, its still better than what you see elsewhere.

About the "60%" poll that liberals have been talking about quite a bit recently - its important to be precise about the language of the poll to determine what was really said. Here is a breakdown of the results - What the poll determined was that 60% of the polled participants "oppose the Iraq war" and a majority support at least a limited withdrawal of some troops from Iraq by the end of the year. What this *doesn't* mean is that all Americans want all our troops out of Iraq right this minute, although 26% of those polled suggested that. If you look at the numbers, it can be said simultaneously that a majority want at minimum some troop withdrawal, if not all troops withdrawn (61%), and also that a majority want troop levels to change only minimally, if not at all (69%). If isn't the textbook example of a mixed message, than what is? Regardless, Lamont is a far left wacko because he supports policies that are generally unpopular with the American people - complete troop pullout, nationalized health care, anti Wal-Mart, pro-abortion - he is a walking, talking laundry list of issues that are supported by far-left radicals.

I completely and utterly reject the idea that Joe Lieiberman is a candidate that doesn't speak for the voters of CT, for a variety of obvious reasons. To suggest that he is doing this because of ego, or acting like a spolied brat, etc. is demagogery, pure and simple.

1) You cannot say that Lamont is a candidate that has broad Democratic approval in CT, since he really only won HALF of the votes in the Democratic primary... and that was even after our friends in the liberal grassroots stuffed the Democratic voter base by 20,000 votes since May. Joe Lieberman won roughly half of the votes in the primary in a margin similar to the Presidentiall election in '04. According to liberals, GWB does not have a mandate to govern the way he chooses because 48% of Americans disagree with him. If you libs want to say this, than you cannot say that Lamont has a mandate either because 48% of Democratic voters in CT disagreed. Liberals are treating Connecticut Democratic voters in '06 like they treated Republican voters nationally in '04. How much more insane can we possibly get?

2) The plurality of voters in CT are actually registered Independants. In the lastest poll, 53% of likely voters said that Lieberman deserves to be re-elected and half doubt Lamont's ability to do the job - So what does this mean? It means that Lieberman, and presumably his politics, are being supported broadly by Democrats, Independants and Republicans - more importantly, his Democratic losses are being more than offset by his support amongst Independants and Republicans. This is proof that a majority of Connecticut voters still support Joe Lieberman despite his party affiliation. It defies logic to suggest that with support like that he shouldn't run.

Its beyond question. Joe Lieberman has broad support in Connecticut amongst its voters. He is not an unpopular candidate in CT when he has half of the Democratic support and a large majority of the support of everyone else. Its foolish to state that Lamont's victory in the primary was a testament to democracy but Lieberman winning a general election degrades democracy. Primaries are important only to the extent that a politician is chosen to represent a single political party, and that if you don't pick the right candidate you will not win regardless of who is running your campaign. It doesn't necessarily say anything about who most of the voters in their particular jurisdiction support - this is extremely important and if more liberals understood that concept (and the point about the virtual split between Demos in CT between Lamont and Lieberman) then a lot of this complaining would cease.

Last point - enough with the complaints about "not being heard" or "being excluded" in government. Believe me, PLENTY of liberal representation in Congress is making your points for you nobody is more loud and outspoken then the liberal Democrats out there. Just because you are not getting what you want doesn't mean that you aren't being heard. Liberals will get their way when they win majorities and are able to set the leglislative agenda. If you cannot win a majority when you are running for office, or trying to introduce a bill, then you simply are not going to have it your way. Interestingly enough, previous to 1994 when Democrats ran the show in Congress for 50 years I never heard of Democrats complaining about the lack of political parity. My advice to Democrats is similar to yours - get out there, speak out, get your votes together and win. Convince other people that you are right. Get more seats in Congress, win the Presidency, then you will be able to get what you want.
dcoffee - 08/20/06 22:00
I wish we could have this conversation in person. People like Rush Limbaugh and Bill Orieley are really bad spokespeople for the conservatives. They seem as if their party loyalty is getting in the way of good judgment. You and I could probably have a good conversation, and we'd both walk away a little more informed about the other side of the spectrum.

About the 2 party system. I'd like to see is Instant Runoff Voting (IRV) :::link::: used in some American elections.

Under the IRV system you rank the candidates, and that's how you cast your vote. Election officials start by looking at everyone’s number one choice, if someone has over 50% then they win, if not some people's second choice votes are added to the total, until someone has a majority. Naturally when we are deciding who to vote for we rank the candidates in our minds, why not put it down on paper so election officials can see what you are really thinking. Instead of holding back your vote for a third party because you think you are wasting your vote..

A multi party democracy would work very well in the US. I'd bet voter turnout would be much higher. And the debates that surround elections would truly address the issues that Americans are thinking about.
ajay - 08/20/06 20:41
(e:Joshua), you're just trying to put lipstick on a pig. Your facts are all messed up, and you just make things up as you go along to fit the basic tenet of your political thinking: "democrats bad. republicans good. hail to the (republican) chief.".

You call Lamont "a far left wacko who is ... anti-Walmart, pro-abortion"; but here are the facts:

Ned Lamont and Joe Lieberman are both anti-Walmart: :::link:::

On Abortion, Lieberman said: "I did not say nor do I believe that Roe [v Wade] should be looked at again, revisited or reconsidered,". :::link:::


jason - 08/20/06 16:20
I like Lieberman. I voted for him to be my Vice President. If you ask me the culling should have started with the unprincipled bastards who voted for the war when it was politically convenient for them to do so, and then started to make shitty excuses for themselves later.
chico - 08/20/06 14:27
Should Republicans still pull for Lieberman after his most recent remarks about Rumsfeld?
:::link:::
jason - 08/19/06 19:06
I really wonder if it's true that we would experience the same kind of negative effects of having multiple parties that other countries do, particularly considering differences in governing styles. Is Euro law making really so much the same as ours? I'm no lawyer.