zoink

You dodged the question. The question is, how can my vote force my opinion while yours doesn't, if your opinion (regarding abortion, in this case) to me is unacceptable? Because one position is restrictive and DOES force an opinion on others, while the other position essentially doesn't. The anti-abortion position places an injunction on the practice by everyone, while the pro-choice position allows one to place one's own injunction on the practice (for oneself), or not. In other words, there's an asymmetry here between these stances. One side IS foisting its view on the other, while the converse isn't necessarily true. It's similar with gay marriage. Allowing gay marriage doesn't force one to marry someone of the same sex. But the anti-gay-marriage position DOES place an injunction on others doing so, when it's really not anyone else's business.

Somehow this is strictly a bash against republicans, as though only republicans are responsible for all the problems. I'd like to hold all politicians accountable. Don't forget Congress has been 'controlled' by the democrats at times... I Well, Democrats have had control of Congress for all of two years in recent memory. Setting that aside, it's pretty clear who has been taking the country in its present direction. Government by the rich and for the rich. Interestingly, our present course, as bad as it is, has more to do with *class* than with partisan loyalty. I've always been fascinated by the fact that nobody really talks about class distinction and social priorities in politics, when it tends to be the prevailing motivator behind the decisions of elected officials. We act as if class isn't even there, or as if it's not a real issue. It is THE issue. Elect a millionaire, and he'll tend to make decisions that benefit other millionaires. It wasn't always this way, but it is now. There was once a time when the wealthy used to go into public service to actually help common people. This was a tradition in the elite families of the Northeast, where once you'd "made it" you went into government to better the lots of others. It was a statement of virtue. The Roosevelt family is one example. The family of John Adams (and descendants) is another. A lot of this came from the grounding of education in Enlightenment philosophy, belief in the rights of man, etc. Regardless, that sort of "elite" has been supplanted by something more like the robber barons of the late 19th century, the kind of people who would go around quoting William Graham Sumner.

I don't understand how so many can miss so much about Obama. How can one question the inexperience of Palin, who is running for VICE President, yet IGNORE the inexperience of Obama, who is running for PRESIDENT?? That's an easy one. The difference between Obama and Palin has to do with adaptivity and intellectual capacity, and not necessarily directly measurable experience. We need a president who is intelligent. The office is so unique in its rigors and demands as times change and events unfold that NOBODY really has "experience" that ultimately fits the position. It's more about talent and ability. There are qualities that tend to define someone as presidential material, and probably chief among them is this certain flexible and adaptable intelligence, which also includes the willingness to listen to others, think in non-partisan terms, seek the counsel of experts, and consider multiple points of view in making decisions. In contrast, Republicans have demonstrated a dangerous combination of stubbornness and inability at this. Republican foreign and domestic policy has adhered to the tired philosophy that what is good for corporate America is by default good for the rest of America. Sort of a cross between Reagan's trickle down myth wherein the "free market" always brings the greatest good, and early 20th century corporatism espoused by the likes of Calvin Coolidge. Yes, McCain is a war hero, and I suppose, a good legislator. But he is out of touch. He went on record not long ago admitting he knew next to nothing about economics, and admitted that he would need to pick a VP who was strong in that area. That person is now Palin (!!??). Moreover, his position on foreign policy is a relic of the Cold War. He still has it in his mind that "winning" is a simple matter of bringing sufficient might to bear. To put it bluntly, he's no TR, and this is not 1898. Meanwhile, Palin is the everyman (or woman) candidate, which is fine, but we don't need an everyman as vice president. We need exceptional people for this position, and soccer moms don't cut it. Some may find her likable as a person, but that's not really relevant. America has had a problem with this for some time now, this aversion when it comes to electing people smarter than themselves. It should be clear by now that when you elect a wastrel C student with strong corporate ties, it puts you where we are right now, which is not a good place. On that point, I think it's interesting how the word "elite" has been thrown around and contested in this campaign. The word has two primary connotations in our culture, describing in turn people who are smarter than average, and people who are wealthier than average. Strangely, many seem to prefer a candidate of the latter type over the former. We resent people who are smarter than we are, but admire and envy those who are materially successful.

Are you worried about your job? No. Though business has slowed quite a bit. Ability to pay rent or mortgage? My monthly mortgage payment is affordable, so I don't foresee a problem there. Thankfully I bought my home in 95 before housing costs went through the roof. Your retirement / 401k? Don't have a 401K. I think this is a salient lesson for those that do, however, in the artificiality and caprice of the stock market. Are you putting off purchases? Yes and no. I've been buying up used gear here and there on CL. I'm not planning any major new gear purchases in the near future. Maybe as soon as I see a Motif ES for under a grand I'll replace my Motif 8. Is it altering your income directly from music? I no longer make music for a living, which means I can now simply enjoy it. Friends of mine who play live have reported a downturn in the number of people going out to hear live music, though. Are you worried about a prolonged recession? I'm not really worried about it, though it may happen. Recessions are actually healthy in the long run. Any economy as wealthy and volatile as ours is bound to become fat and lazy because of a tendency toward excess and "getting rich quickly". Recessions are a way to trim the fat and get back to fiscal responsibility.

I have the Omniraxx Commander: http://www.computersandmusic.com/sitemap/p/Omnirax_Commander_278.htm It's very good ergonomically, but also very BIG -- bigger than it looks in that picture. It's also up on 8 wheels so you can roll it around and get behind it. Easily worth the investment.