Originally Posted by Croakmore

I like McCain, too, but he seems more like an Eisenhower in a country that is still looking for a Kennedy. Meanwhile, Nixons show up here and there to reign terror on just about everybody.

Croaker, spoken like a true Adaptive, using generational refs from then past and everything! Feeling nostalgic are ya? Feel like the 50's to ya? It does to me. :wink:

Having said all that, big sister, I'll say further that a 4T has begun sufficiently to greet the tottling Homelanders. We're in "The Late Twenties," so to speak; "The Thirties" are just around the corner, and we are acting as if it were otherwise.

That could be right as rain, Lil Bro.

It's good to have you back, Croaker

Thanks, glad to be back with ya!

Originally Posted by Croakmore

Oh, here's a sure sign of a 4T in the turning: Puyallup School District in the great state of Washington has canceled all Holloween activities and no costumes will be allowed at school, all of which have been officially declared offensive to the many devout Wiccans who happen to haunt the neighborhood. This is a remarkable show of respect for a religion that usually gets kicked around by the jackboots.

Now, I must ask: Aren't Wiccans worshipers of the Devil? Is there possibly a hidden agenda here?

Inquiring frogs need to know.

Well, that described the happenings down here ten years ago. But now, the costumes are again back in the schools for one day only, and all the churches have their own festivals and kids can wear costumes. The nicer white neighborhoods get bombarded by hispanic children nonstop for trick-or-treating door to door, driven over by their parents, who idle slowly along on the street in their cars and vans. In case anyone takes this as a racist observation, don't get started on it. It's a fact. My grandkids went to the biggest hispanic neighborhood to turn the tables one year, and no one was there. LOL

I do not know about the Wiccans, other than they sacrifice small animals at hand-fastings, but I do know that Halloween is from All Hallow's Eve, which is the night before All Souls' Day/All Saint's Day, so it's like the Souls of all dead/Saints rising again to be honored and remembered, a truly benign and religious origin, Celtic, I think.

Originally Posted by Rick Hirst

Seriously, my kids plan their Halloween costumes all year long (even if they always leave actual construction to the last minute. It's the grade-school version of the Prom.)

Hehe, never thought about it that way, but you are right! :lol:

Originally Posted by Rick Hirst

At my kids' school, the 28th is a "Harvest Festival" -- costumes are allowed but not encouraged -- and the 29th is a "Teacher Preparation Day" (i.e. no school). This has been the practice for several years; it's partly a PC thing, so as to avoid offending fundies and Muslims as well as Wiccans; but I think the bigger motivation is to keep non-academic pursuits from taking over the school day. Seriously, my kids plan their Halloween costumes all year long (even if they always leave actual construction to the last minute. It's the grade-school version of the Prom.)

CNN seems to agree with you.

Originally Posted by CNN

SEATTLE, Washington (Reuters) -- A Washington state school district has banned Halloween parties during the school day because it says children dressed up as goblins and witches take time away from learning, officials said Thursday.

"Our number one priority is protecting the instructional day," said Puyallup School District Superintendent Tony Apostle after the district canceled observance of the October 31 celebration.

Apostle said the 20,000-student district, located about 30 miles south of Seattle, doesn't have enough time in the day as it is to teach students everything they need to know.

District spokeswoman Karen Hansen said most Puyallup schools haven't had Halloween celebrations or observations for years.

Schools that want to have Halloween parties are welcome to have them, she said, but only after the school day ends.

Other U.S. schools have banned Halloween festivities because some families don't celebrate it for religious reasons and other cannot afford costumes.

Originally Posted by Barbara

...I do not know about the Wiccans, other than they sacrifice small animals at hand-fastings...

Troubling indeed!

Originally Posted by Barbara

I do not know about the Wiccans, other than they sacrifice small animals at hand-fastings, (snip)

I have some knowledge about matters Wiccan, and that's a new one on me! The forms of Wicca which I'm somewhat familar with would consider any such act to be a major league abomination.

Another possible sign of an approaching 4T: the radicals of the Left (and presumably of the Right as well) are less willing to throw away their votes on no-hope Third-Party candidates this time than before - bad news for both Ralph Nader and Michael Peroutka. There is a growing sense, if not consensus, that this election is too important for any more of such 'message-sending' nonsense. That it (or the next one) will determine the shape of things to come in America (and the world in general) for decades to come.

Originally Posted by Titus Sabinus Parthicus

Another possible sign of an approaching 4T: the radicals of the Left (and presumably of the Right as well) are less willing to throw away their votes on no-hope Third-Party candidates this time than before - bad news for both Ralph Nader and Michael Peroutka. There is a growing sense, if not consensus, that this election is too important for any more of such 'message-sending' nonsense. That it (or the next one) will determine the shape of things to come in America (and the world in general) for decades to come.

I notice you didn't mention Badnarik. He's apparently polling extremely low, under 0.1% even when his name is mentioned in polls. I had expected him to take the torch from the Naderites, but apparently Nader's remaining supporters are "bitter-enders". I expect Nader's vote total to drop from 2.7% nationally to less than 1%, with Kerry the primary beneficiary. Thus my prediction of a Kerry PV margin of about 1.5% (1% plus the 0.5% margin from E2K.)

Originally Posted by Croakmore

Originally Posted by Barbara

...I do not know about the Wiccans, other than they sacrifice small animals at hand-fastings...

Troubling indeed!

No offense, but don't they prefer something more endothermic?

Originally Posted by Titus Sabinus Parthicus

Originally Posted by Barbara

I do not know about the Wiccans, other than they sacrifice small animals at hand-fastings, (snip)

I have some knowledge about matters Wiccan, and that's a new one on me! The forms of Wicca which I'm somewhat familiar with would consider any such act to be a major league abomination.

Agreed. While the old time pagans were into animal sacrifice (as were the old time monotheists before the Romans destroyed the Temple in Jerusalem) I have not encountered modern neo-pagans who have revived the practice. Again, though, there is no organized central authority telling neo-pagans how to worship. Somewhere there might be a few odd circles who have revived that aspect of the old traditions. I would agree that any group I have had contact with would consider such to be abomination. The neo-pagans seem to be reinventing the Old Time Religion as it ought to have been, not as it was. As such, at least in my experience in New England, their values end up being centered as much in the 60s awakening as in the Agricultural Age. You don't have the equivalent of the Christian Agricultural Age texts considered the Word of God.

You hear of both Christians and Jews who have daydreams of rebuilding the Jewish Temple in Jerusalem. A few of the Jews remember that by law the Temple is the one place where animal sacrifice is acceptable to God. (The cynic in me suspects the central authorities of the time had political and economic reasons for inventing that tradition.) If the Temple is rebuilt, will the ultra orthodox Jews really follow the old traditions?

Just curious. If the Jews try to clear the Muslims off Temple Mount in Jerusalem to build a new temple, I suspect the rituals to be performed there will be the least of our problems.

Originally Posted by William Jennings Bryan

Originally Posted by Croakmore

Originally Posted by Barbara

...I do not know about the Wiccans, other than they sacrifice small animals at hand-fastings...

Troubling indeed!

No offense, but don't they prefer something more endothermic?

I think we are all correct here. From my knowledge of it (long story, but it involved an intense romantic relationship of my daughter's I was dragged into, even at one point attending a friend's hand-fasting), there ARE assorted variants of it in practice. Those modernist Wiccans do not sacrifice, but other sects who practice a more ancient form closer to witchcraft do. This would be the variant where Wicca = Witch. Tis all I know.

Portrait of a Country on the Verge of a Nervous Breakdown
With only nine days to go and the polls showing Bush and Kerry still neck and neck, the result is once again likely to turn on the minutiae of the voting system. But this time the whole country seems poised to descend into post-election chaos. Andrew Gumbel reports on the traumatizing effects of this bitter campaign and how, as the world's most powerful democracy talks of exporting freedom to Iraq, it is at risk of becoming an object of international ridicule
by Andrew Gumbel

No need to wonder if this year's US presidential election is headed for another meltdown: the meltdown has already started. The voting machines have already begun to break down, accusations of systematic voter suppression and fraud are rampant, and lawyers fully armed and ready with an intimate knowledge of the nation's byzantine election laws have flocked to court to cry foul in half a dozen states.

Nine days out from election day, we don't yet know whether the state-by-state arithmetic will lead to a post-election stalemate similar to the 36-day battle for Florida in 2000. It is, of course, possible that the margins of victory in the 50 states will be wide enough to avert the worst - even if overall conditions are likely to fall short of the usual definition of a free and fair election.

Given the nail-bitingly close numbers in the opinion polls, however, Election 2004 could just as easily produce a concatenation of knockdown, drag-out fights in several states at once, making the d?b?cle in Florida four years ago look, in retrospect, like the constitutional equivalent of a vicarage tea party.

Last week saw the start of early voting in Florida and a clutch of other states, and with it came a plethora of problems. In three heavily populated counties - around Tampa, Orlando and Fort Lauderdale - the network connection used to verify voter identifications broke down on the first day, creating hours of delay. In Jacksonville, where poor ballot design in 2000 knocked out the votes of 27,000 poor, predominantly black, predominantly Democratic voters, the county elections supervisor chose the first day of polling to resign, citing ill health. He had come under fire for failing to make early voting available in the city's African-American neighborhoods - something his interim successor is now going some way to remedy.

Elsewhere, there were computer breakdowns during early voting in Memphis. Pre-election testing of electronic machines in Riverside County, California, and in Palm Beach County, Florida, led to multiple computer crashes. Elsewhere, machines have manifested problems handling basic addition - especially when asked to display instructions in a language other than English. Several county administrators have chosen simply to skip the non-English language part of the test.

In Nebraska, dead people were found to have applied for absentee ballots. In Ohio, a representative of the National Association for the Advancement of Colored People was found to have offered crack cocaine to a known drug addict in exchange for completed voter registration forms, which he duly submitted in the names of Mary Poppins, Janet Jackson and Jeffrey Dahmer, the notorious cannibal serial killer.

This is just the beginning. The Kerry campaign alone has signed up 10,000 lawyers around the country to oversee registration and absentee ballot procedures, keep tabs on computer voting companies, collect stories of alleged disenfranchisement or irregularities at the polls, and watch state elections officials with hawk-eyed attention for every ruling that might be construed as having a partisan, rather than a public interest intent.

"The lawyering won't start the day after the election," said Kendall Coffey, a Democratic Party lawyer in Miami who was deeply involved in the 2000 fiasco. "It's already under way." Florida Congressman Robert Wexler, who is deep in litigation with his state government over the failure of Florida's electronic voting machines to produce an independent paper trail, concurred. "The dangers are limitless," he said. "They are limited only by the inventiveness of those who would tamper with the system and create havoc."

It beggars belief that the world's most powerful democracy should find itself in this hole for the second time in a row - becoming an object of international ridicule, scorn and not a little alarm, even as the country's leaders talk idealistically about exporting American freedom and democracy to Afghanistan, Iraq and beyond.

After the last fiasco everyone from President Bush down vowed to fix the system and ensure another Florida could never happen. But three big things went wrong. First, the new generation of computer touchscreen machines - brought in at dizzying speed and at even more dizzying cost to replace the discredited old punch-cards - turned out to be poorly programmed, unverifiable, prone to all manner of failure and susceptible to undetectable foul play.

Secondly, the Bush administration dragged its feet about enacting funding its own new election laws. As a result, most states won't have their electoral procedures fully updated and coordinated until the next presidential election in 2008. That, in turn, is opening up furious arguments about the ill-defined rules for provisional ballots, absentee ballots, ID card requirements at polling stations and other seemingly esoteric bureaucratic niceties that could have a huge impact on turnout - especially among the poorer, less educated classes who have traditionally been ignored, if not excluded, by the two major parties.

Thirdly, the political leadership allowed itself to be deluded into thinking that the dysfunctions of the US electoral system were purely a matter of technology. Fix the machines, the thinking went, and everything else will be fine. What should have been glaringly obvious in 2000, and is even more glaringly obvious now, is that the failures of the electoral process were a direct result of the ferocity of broader political battles. The blithe incompetence of local election officials and their wonky machinery were side-effects of these battles, not the cause.

In 2000, much of the agony of Florida could in fact have been avoided if the parties had agreed to a state-wide manual recount - as happened in an equally close, but amicably resolved, Senate race in Washington state that year. It was the high stakes of the White House, not the messy accumulation of hanging, dimpled and pregnant chads, that sparked the crisis. And we know the stakes are infinitely higher this time, in what has been called the most important US election in memory.

There has been nothing to match the current passions in American politics since the Civil Rights era and the Vietnam War. Campaigns have never been dirtier, or more intensely fought or more expensive. Both major parties have vowed to do whatever it takes to win, and each has accused the other of engaging in out-and-out cheating.

The whole country - never mind the woefully inadequate electoral system - is now living on the edge of a nervous breakdown. Little wonder, then, if many are predicting some sort of collapse on 2 November. "Only a miracle, it strikes me, can prevent this election from descending into post-election chaos," John Dean, the Watergate-era White House counsel who knows a thing or two about electoral dirty tricks, wrote last week.

What has been striking is the sheer nastiness of the fight. In Oregon, Pennsylvania and Nevada - all swing states - a Republican political consulting group called Sproul & Associates has been accused of passing itself off as a non-partisan or even a Democratic civic organization to collect voter registration applications outside libraries and supermarkets. In at least two instances now under criminal investigation, company employees have been accused of processing the applications of declared Republican voters while throwing the forms marked Democrat into the nearest rubbish bin. Sproul, which has received more than $600,000 (?330,000) from the Republican National Committee, has denied ever endorsing such practices. Still, the discarded voter registration forms have been paraded on television for all to see.

In Ohio and Florida, it is the Republican secretaries of state - who oversee elections - who have been accused of putting partisan preference above their solemn civic duties. Ohio's Ken Blackwell won points from voting rights activists earlier in the year when he chose not to go ahead with a massive state-wide buy of electronic voting machines. Since then, however, he has tried to insist that all voter registration forms be submitted on 80lb stock paper - a ruling struck down by the courts after he was accused of blatantly attempting to suppress the votes of likely Democrats.

He has also tried to make life harder for provisional voters, saying their ballots will be recognized only if they show up at exactly the right precinct. This too was struck down in court because it was deemed likely to suppress votes - especially among transient students and low-income workers. But Secretary Blackwell has continued to implement the policy in defiance of the court order, prompting a harsh rebuke from the judge.

In Florida, Secretary of State Glenda Hood has been repeatedly accused of doing the political bidding of the man who appointed her - Governor Jeb Bush, the President's brother. Her more recent exploits include directing county supervisors to throw out registration forms where applicants have signed a statement declaring they are US citizens but have forgotten to check a citizenry box elsewhere on the form. This, too, is seen as a vote-suppressing mechanism. It, too, is now in the courts.

Secretary Hood has also been waging a months-long campaign to ban what limited manual recounts the electronic voting machines permit. Her initial ruling was struck down by the courts, but now she has come up with a staggeringly devious rewrite. The state will now permit analysis of the computerized machines' internal audit logs in the event of a close race, she said, but if there is any discrepancy the county supervisors are to go with the original count. In other words: we will do recounts, but if the recounts change the outcome we will disregard them.

Secretary Hood's actions illuminate the real attraction of the electronic voting machines in the states where they have been introduced. They may work no better than the old punch-card machines - studies suggest they fail to record as many votes as their predecessors. In the absence of an independent paper trail, how- ever, all evidence of problems is hidden away in the binary code of an electronic black box and is, to all intents and purposes, invisible.

This raises intriguing and troubling questions about what a post-election contest might look like. One can reasonably anticipate - based on past experience - an avalanche of stories about voters turned away from polling stations, told they are on a felons list even if they have no criminal record, or kept waiting for hours because of technical glitches. No doubt people will tell some of those thousands of lawyers how they pressed the screen for one candidate, only to have the other's name light up.

The problem is, even if lawyers for the losing candidate are able to prove that the system failed, they will find it very difficult to talk specific numbers and demonstrate that enough votes were lost to alter the outcome.

How the courts will react to this hypothetical state of affairs is anybody's guess. They could accept the given election results, however flawed. They could allow the arguments to rage until December, when the electoral college is supposed to meet, or even into the new year, when an undecided election would be thrown into the House of Representatives.

Or they could be trumped, once again, by the Supreme Court. The most disconcerting possibility is that the highest court in the land could remove the electoral process from the voters altogether and turn it over to the state legislatures. Technically, they can do this under Article II of the Constitution, which offers no automatic right to vote. We know from the deliberations in 2000 that two, possibly five, of the nine justices have doubts whether the people should be the ultimate arbiters of presidential elections - a strict, literal reading of the Constitution that no modern Supreme Court countenanced before the current crop of ultra-conservatives. "After granting the franchise in the special context of Article II," the majority declared in its Bush vs Gore ruling, "[the state] can take back the power to appoint electors."

Were this scenario to play out it would leave the fate of many of the electoral battlegrounds in the hands of Republican-controlled state legislatures (in Florida and Ohio, for starters), who would promptly hand the election to George Bush. Talk about a nightmare scenario - which is why every elections official and every "small d" democrat in the land is praying it won't get that close.

This is almost funny. Middle Eastern nations worried about instability in the US?

Arabs Worried About the Impact of ?Second US Civil War?
Amir Taheri, Arab News ?

JEDDAH, 25 October 2004 ? Normally it is Washington that worries about stability in Arab countries.

These days, however, there is much official nail biting in Arab capitals over the threat of instability in the United States.

?What we are witnessing in the United States is their second civil war,? says an Arab diplomat posted to Washington. ?The difference is that this war is waged in the media, in churches, on the hustings, and inside many American homes.?

That next week?s presidential election is the closest in US history seems certain. What is causing concern in Arab and other capitals is that the intense passions unleashed by both sides could provoke instability and violence regardless of who wins.

Arab diplomats, speaking on condition of anonymity, claim that the Democrats, many of whom believe their party was robbed of victory in 2000, are determined to fight hard to dislodge President George W. Bush from the White House.

Fears that the ?American street? might explode, in the fashion often attributed to the ?Arab street,? may well be exaggerated. But the possibility of US government becoming paralyzed for weeks, if not months, as a result of disputes over election results cannot be discounted.

Both President Bush and his Democrat challenger Sen. John Kerry start from a solid support base of around 40 percent of the electorate each. The remaining 20 percent consists of undecided or floating voters whose decision could affect the outcome in 12 states still up for grabs.

In the 2000 presidential election the closeness of the results in the state of Florida provoked a legal duel that was ultimately decided by the US Supreme Court. This time the experience of Florida could be repeated in many other states.

Both Republicans and Democrats have already set up legal headquarters in Florida, New Mexico, Arizona, Colorado, Nevada, Oregon, Wisconsin, Minnesota, Iowa, Ohio, West Virginia and New Hampshire. Most polls show the two candidates neck-and-neck in those states. That means the outcome could be decided by a few dozen or a few hundred votes. Some of the states have laws under which if the margin of victory is less than half of one percent a recount is automatically conducted. Others have no such laws, forcing the loser to take the matter to court on other grounds such as possible fraud.

The Florida fight in 2000 dragged on for more than a month. Similar fights in a dozen or more states could last longer. And that could put American decision-making on autopilot, so to speak.

?The prospect of the US being unable to take urgent decisions for months cannot be taken lightly,? suggests an Arab diplomat. ?Such paralysis could be dangerous in our region where the situation remains volatile. The war in Iraq, the dispute over Iran?s nuclear ambitions, the UN fight with Syria over Lebanon, and the Israeli plan to withdraw from Gaza cannot be put on the backburner for months.?

The calendar of events for the three months ahead is unusually full in the region.

? Three weeks after the American election Egypt will host an international conference, in Sharm al-Sheikh on the future of Iraq. A lame-duck US administration bogged down in domestic electoral disputes would lack the clout and he credibility to provide leadership.

? A few days after that the International Atomic Energy Agency will have to decide whether to refer Iran to the United Nations? Security Council for an allegedly illegal nuclear program.

? Also in November Hamed Karzai is scheduled to be sworn in as the first directly elected president of Afghanistan, and to form a new Cabinet. Again, the US is required to play a central role in bringing the rival factions together to ensure a smooth transition to a pluralist system in Kabul.

? Early in December UN Secretary-General Kofi Annan is scheduled to report on Syria?s compliance with resolution 1559 that requires the withdrawal of foreign troops from Lebanon. Political paralysis in Washington could render action impossible, thus deepening the crisis in Lebanon.

? In January, Iraq is scheduled to hold elections for a Constituent Assembly to approve the draft of a new constitution for submission to popular vote in a referendum. The perception that the US is too pre-occupied with domestic electoral disputes to focus on Iraqi elections could encourage the forces that are fighting to disrupt the process of democratization in Baghdad.

? In February, Israel is expected to start withdrawing troops from Gaza. This would require American leadership in forming an international peacekeeping force.

If Bush wins the Democrats are certain to do all they can to delay the finalization of the results through litigation.

But even if Kerry wins, the transition might not be as smooth as in 2000. The Republicans are likely to retain control of the Senate; and that would give them the possibility of delaying the formation of a Kerry administration by vetoing his nominees for key posts.

?It may be exaggerated that we are biting our nails in worry,? says an Arab official. ?But we need contingency plans to cope with a situation in which the US is busy with its domestic fights.?

From the Washington Post, standard disclaimers apply. By the way, I actually know the mother of the toddler quoted in the article; she used to belong to my babysitting coop and I've sat for the baby boy and unsuccessfully tried to put him to bed! :wink:

Not to Worry -- The End Is Very Near
As Pre-Election Anxiety Disorder Sets In, Just Remember: You'll Live. Probably.

By Joel Achenbach
Washington Post Staff Writer
Monday, October 25, 2004; Page C01

Americans are in the grip of a monster case of Pre-Election Anxiety Disorder. No one is talking about voter apathy anymore, because the opposite is more likely the case. People care too much. They're losing sleep. They're having bad dreams about unfavorable tracking polls.

PEAD worsens as Election Day approaches and it's a 50-50 country and there's a war going on and people are dying and the talking heads are howling and the polls come firing at your head like fastballs. It's too close to call, too close, too close, we know the whole thing could pivot with the slightest breeze, that nothing is too trivial now, that even the slightest verbal gaffe by a candidate or his wife or one of the daughters could have a butterfly effect on world history.

The stakes are high in the 2004 presidential race and you can see it on the faces of voters such as George Wagner of Cedar Falls, Iowa, who was listening to a stump speech last week by John Kerry. (Robert F. Bukaty -- The Washington Post)

Lawsuits are flying as we speak, and the election may come down to a single precinct in Winter Haven or Deland or Immokalee, followed by the soon-to-be-traditional Recount, the dueling press conferences, James A. Baker flying to Tallahassee, and a final and definitive verdict by Nino Scalia.

Laura Auerbach, a Democrat and the director of a Washington research foundation, finds herself struggling with her emotions as E-Day gets closer. She hates the president. He's a "horrible" man, she says. She sent an e-mail to a friend: "I never feel like such a bad person as I do when I'm talking about Bush. He is so hateful he makes me hate."

The worst part is that her 2-year-old, Ben, is picking up on her rage, and she feels as though she's a bad role model. She and her husband routinely fume about George W. Bush, and the little boy sometimes asks why they're upset.

"I'll explain to him, 'Ben, there are people out there who don't always make what Mommy thinks are the right choices.' "

Parents making speeches to toddlers: A classic sign of pre-election stress.

Democrat Sally Aman, who has a public relations firm, says her daughter's kindergarten teacher recently decided that her students should participate in a presidential straw poll. Everyone, apparently, has to take a position on the election these days, even those who are primarily interested in the latest policy about lollipops. Stand up to your full height of 3 feet 6 inches and be counted.

"Everybody I know is just obsessed," Aman says.

It's a bipartisan disorder, but Democrats are struggling the most, haunted by what happened last time. Republicans, though guardedly optimistic, are still supremely frustrated by the way this thing is dragging out and staying close. "The hardest thing to understand is why haven't we put this guy away a long time ago," a prominent Republican confides in a low murmur.

The main Republican fear is fraud.

"The Republicans think that the Democratic purported 'turnout effort' is an effort to have people vote early and often," says Mike Carvin, a Republican lawyer who has worked on voting issues, including the 2000 recount.

GOP partisans worry about Democratic shenanigans if John Kerry loses a close election. There are tales of 10,000 Democratic lawyers, organized into SWAT teams, descending on disputed states. Part of election anxiety these days is the absolute certainty that the other side will steal any election that's not nailed down. Florida might have been merely a warm-up for a truly apocalyptic 2004 recount, Carvin suggests.

"If there is a recount this time, it will be in five states and it will last at least two months, and it will be a nightmare, and it will make Florida look like a well-oiled machine," Carvin says.


A Democratic lobbyist, who asked not to be identified because he doesn't want his colleagues to think he is "unhinged," says, "My wife is constantly telling me, 'You've got to calm down. You've got to let go.' " But how can he? Aren't the stakes too high? "I'm really worried about the country," he says.

Normally one could diagnose this as a normal Washington neurosis, but it seems to be a national pandemic. Candice Russell, a freelance writer and art curator in South Florida, says she had a visceral reaction to a poll showing Bush creeping ahead of Kerry: "I'm so depressed, I'm sick over it." She was supposed to work at a phone bank but just couldn't bring herself to it. Needed a day to pull herself together. She spoke on her cell phone while scanning the street, which was lined with Bush signs. "How stupid could Americans be?" she asks.



The stakes are high in the 2004 presidential race and you can see it on the faces of voters such as George Wagner of Cedar Falls, Iowa, who was listening to a stump speech last week by John Kerry. (Robert F. Bukaty -- The Washington Post)

In Birmingham, Ala., chiropractor and nutritionist Rodger Murphree says he has patients who are suffering from election stress. Many are Republicans. "We live in such a stressed-out society, go go go, do do do society, when you add to that the unknown of what could happen -- that's really scary for some people. People don't really know what's going to happen if John Kerry's elected."

Politics is normally somewhat compartmentalized, except for those who are serious junkies and those paid to live and breathe it, but this is a moment when the rest of life is pushed into a compartment. Americans will return to mundane matters like art and music and literature when the last returns from Nov. 2 are counted, hopefully at some point prior to mid-December.

Michael Gillenwater, who works for a nonprofit environmental organization, had a bad dream recently in which people were deciding not to vote for Kerry because of his reference in the third debate to Dick Cheney's lesbian daughter. Gillenwater woke up at 3:30 a.m. and couldn't get back to sleep for two hours. "I totally have pre-election anxiety," he says.

Anecdotally you hear about close friendships being ripped apart by differing political allegiances. Forget the old wedge issues, like abortion, affirmative action, taxes: The election itself is a wedge issue. If you're not feeling wedged you're not paying attention.

Pre-Election Anxiety Disorder is often driven by serious and rational fears, with global events so alarming. Technology ensures that we are stalked by data, that we're always hearing about who's up, who's down, what's the latest controversy, the latest menace to peace and sanity and good health. We get all twisted up by the spin cycle.

Republicans fear a Kerry victory will mean appeasement to the terrorists and the French, and will be a major step toward the ultimate horror, a Hillary presidency. Democrats believe a Bush reelection will mean endless war and a return to the economic system known as feudalism.

David Gergen, veteran presidential adviser and pundit, says, "We're at a point now where each side has so demonized the other, and played upon fear as a major driving force behind the candidate, that there is a deep anxiety now that if your side loses, the country is going to go to ruin."

David Abshire, who served in the Nixon and Reagan administrations and is now president of the Center for the Study of the Presidency, has written a long treatise on the loss of political civility. Rancor among leaders translates into anxiety at the grass roots, he says.

"What civility is, is respect for individuals. It's listening. It is dialogue. And then you may get to higher ground."

It sounds quaint: Higher ground. Meanwhile, you hear people announce that if their guy loses the election they will leave the country outright, like the late Pierre Salinger, who moved to France.

But that's not what people will really do. They'll absorb the facts, celebrate or mourn, and move on with their lives. And somewhere along the way they'll figure out what to tell the children.

Another person warns of civil unrest in the wake of the election. Perhaps, he's read his S&H.

A Nation Divided:
Warning Orders from Sierra Times.com
By J.J. Johnson
We interrupt all the partisan bickering for the following important announcement:

From time to time, we make it our business to look over the horizon and see things coming down the pike, based on information that comes in to the news ranch. With a little over a week left before (S)election 2004, and all the heated rhetoric on both sides, The Sierra Times would like to put all Real Americans on notice:

Prepare for civil unrest America on and/or after election day.

No, there has been no information delivered to us promising violence. Nor do I see the "New World Order" having some grand plan to place everyone under martial law. I do however see the fabric of America fraying at its political seams, with a close election only bringing us closer to a confrontation.

Okay, America - there are no more 'undecided voters', there's no more convincing anyone, to hell with the polling data, and as far as some are concerned, to hell with your vote. Thing only possible way of holding off physical confrontation (read: small to mid-scale civil war in the United States of America) is that someone wins the election - by a large margin?

?and at the time of this writing - fat chance of that happening.

No matter what the results, the stage has already been set for the Presidential Election of 2004 to be declared a fraud, and all but enough has been done to make the final results invalid. Accusations of voter registrations being thrown in the trash. More registered voters that eligible voters in Ohio, Colorado, etc. Democrats telling their people to make charges of voter intimidation - even if there isn't any. (Any by the way: if any of you Democrats think I'm kidding, DNC Terry McAuliffe pretty much confirmed in on NBC's Meet the Press (10.24.04 edition). Lawyers are locked and loaded; ready to make any legal challenge needed to make sure their candidate is victorious. But it won't be enough.

This isn't 2000. This time, the stakes are too high for failure. This time, defeat at the ballot box is not an option. To explain, let's give World War III (and who's best to win or lose it) a back seat for a moment, shall we?

Of the 9 supreme court justices, about 7 of them need to retire. Those that are far beyond time to be put out to pasture dare not leave, else to ability to make arbitrary laws from the bench rather than the legislature goes away?or should we say 'not in someone's favor'. The next president may pick three justices. That goes beyond 4 years - try a few decades. And do we dare allow children to watch the next round of Supreme Court Justice confirmation hearings?

But no, Iraq is the burning issue of the day.

Newsflash: Baby boomers start to retire during the next president's term, and medical costs are going through the roof. While the few logically thinking people would like to debate 'if' we should even pay for it in the first place, the debate will be consumed by 'how' will we pay for it. I remember spending a week filling prescriptions for my grandmother, and even my own, with no insurance. Some serious decisions will have to be made during this next term. Whatever the decision, it'll have an effect on the medical industry and the health and welfare of this nation - for decades. And in case you're wondering where I stand: far off in the distance watching both side point fingers at one another.

But no, we all wanna know who's best for the 'war of terror'?

Patience, we'll get to that shortly.

With the exploding federal budget/deficit (which is paid for by U.S. tax dollars), a bunch of new folks on the employment rolls will fund all the federal programs we need, right? Of course, with all those good jobs going overseas, some people begin to wonder how we're ever going pay all these bills when they come due? And don't bore me by blaming one candidate or the other. The hemorrhaging of the American workforce has been happening long before the current President took office, and the way both are talking, nothing is going to slow it down. Eventually, either the American borders will have to be protected (causing trade wars, border skirmishes, etc), or this nation will begin to balkanize itself.

There will be two competing ideologies to address this issue when the time comes?and will come within the next four years. Yeah, like either of these candidates will repeal NAFTA.

Despite all these issues, Americans have chosen sides. Do you even have the guts to debate issues with the other side any more? Not unless you want to finish the day yelling or throwing blows at each other. Of course, we're already at each other's throats, so what difference does it make?

No, this time, neither side will accept the results of the election, as it is tainted already. It'll start off with lawyer against lawyer, then judge against judge, the who knows - FreeRepublic.com vs. MoveOn.org? Red states vs. blue states? and when that won't settle the matter?

?well, they're already attacking campaign headquarters. Woe to those with signs in their yards, buttons, activists who aren't looking over their shoulder, official state 'electors', etc.

This could get ugly.

On one side you have those that believe George W. Bush's foreign policy makes him the most dangerous man on earth, there are some willing to do whatever it takes to remove him from that office. On the other side you have John F. Kerry, whose track record after his Vietnam service and his Senate voting record make many believe he is unfit to command, and whose ascension to the oval office may put the future of the nation in jeopardy. Four years ago, this side of the political fence proved they can and will take the matter to the streets if need arises.

The world will be watching. Can the country that is hell-bent on spreading democracy to other nations practice it effectively in its own, or will we follow the path of other third world regimes? Can American actually wage a war that can last past one election cycle, or will we send a signal to all enemies that 'if you're losing the war, just send back enough bad press to get the President un-elected, and you win'?

Or should we trust one President to wage war on his own anymore?

Do we elect a man who launched a war over questionable pretenses, who claims to be a conservative and is not, or do we elect a man who turned against his own countrymen in arms, allowing radical un-American ideology to take hold in the Oval Office once again?

If this house - this nation is truly divided worse than it was four years ago, how can it stand much longer?

Make your decision wisely, America. It's not liberal vs. conservative anymore. Historians will write about America, and how it changed when World War III began (September 11, 2001) how we either approved or rejected our government's response in the war (November 2, 2004). And one more thing: no matter how we choose - the American electorate - not the government - will tell the how we will deal with 'terrorism' for the next decade - starting next week.

This Warning Order has not been written in an attempt to make both sides think about the dangerous path they are on, or to prevent what may be the inevitable. Frankly, it is this author's opinion that if it came down to a bloody fight left vs. right in the streets of America to determine the best direction for the future of this once great nation, then so be it?

Check your ammo supply.

It maybe just the cleansing this place needed. In fact, we maybe a few decades overdue. Don't worry. When it comes to elections, no one trusts the courts anymore, and there aren't enough troops on U.S. soil to break up good fight. Perhaps before we go out there balls-to-the-wall to change the world, maybe we should straighten up our own house, first. Grab a broom, folks, and choose sides. Because perhaps - after an almost 140-year cease fire - that time has come upon us again.

Stay tuned?.
(we now return you to your regularly scheduled propaganda)

Well, let's consult the book "T4T" and see how far we have come towards the threshold.

Criteria:

Families: weak or strengthening

Child nuture: tightening or overprotective

Gender gap: minimum or widening

Ideals: debated or championed

Institutions: eroded or founded

Culture: cynical or practical

Social structure: diversified or gravitating

Worldview: complex or simplifying

Social priority: max individualism or growing community

Social motivator: guilt or stigma

Sense of greatest need: do what feels right or fix the outer world

Vision of the future: darkening or urgent

Wars: inconclusive or total

With these parameters, what's the verdict IYO?

As for my verdict . . .

Families: strengthening

Child nuture: tightening

Gender gap: minimum

Ideals: debated

Institutions: eroded

Culture: cynical

Social structure: diversified

Worldview: complex

Social priority: max individualism

Social motivator: stigma

Sense of greatest need: do what feels right

Vision of the future: urgent

Wars: inconclusive

So that's 3 4T characteristics versus 10 3T characteristics in my POV . . .

So we be 3T still but gaining steam on the 4T.

Families: weak or strengthening

Child nurture: tightening or overprotective

Gender gap: minimum or widening

Ideals: debated or championed

Institutions: eroded or founded

Culture: cynical or practical

Social structure: diversified or gravitating

Worldview: complex or simplifying

Social priority: max individualism or growing community

Social motivator: guilt or stigma

Sense of greatest need: do what feels right or fix the outer world

Vision of the future: darkening or urgent

Wars: inconclusive or total

Hmm. I see:


Families: strengthening

Child nurture: overprotective

Gender gap: widening

Ideals: championed

Institutions: eroded

Culture: cynical

Social structure: gravitating

Worldview: simplifying

Social priority: growing community

Social motivator: guilt

Sense of greatest need: fix the outer world

Vision of the future: darkening

Wars: inconclusive

That's 8 4T vs. 5 3T, so we're pretty far along in my opinion..

I think the Crisis will be the dollar crash early next year, although it could be the bursting of the credit bubble. Continued high crude prices won't help.

Families: weak or strengthening STRENGHTENING = 4t

Child nuture: tightening or overprotective TIGHTENING = 3t

Gender gap: minimum or widening WIDENING = 4t

Ideals: debated or championed DEBATED = 3t

Institutions: eroded or founded ERODED = 3t

Culture: cynical or practical PRACTICAL = 3t

Social structure: diversified or gravitating GRAVITATING = 4t

Worldview: complex or simplifying SIMPLIFYING = 4t

Social priority: max individualism or growing community GROWING COMMUNITY = 4t

Social motivator: guilt or stigma STIGMA = 4t

Sense of greatest need: do what feels right or fix the outer world FIX THE OUTER WORLD = 4t


So I get 7 Fourth Turning signs, versus 4 Third Turning ones. We've flipped over the edge, at least since 9/11, possibly even since E2K or the dot-com debacle. As nasty as this election and the likely post-election fallout is becoming, we're staring the Regeneracy right in the face...regardless of who ends up in the White House on January 20.

Families: weak or strengthening: STRENGHTENING = 4t

Child nuture: tightening or overprotective: TIGHTENING = 3t

Gender gap: minimum or widening: WIDENING = 4t

Ideals: debated or championed: DEBATED = 3t

Institutions: eroded or founded: ERODED = 3t

Culture: cynical or practical: PRACTICAL = 3t

Social structure: diversified or gravitating: GRAVITATING = 4t

Worldview: complex or simplifying: SIMPLIFYING = 4t

Social priority: max individualism or growing community: GROWING COMMUNITY = 4t

Social motivator: guilt or stigma: STIGMA = 4t

Sense of greatest need: do what feels right or fix the outer world: FIX THE OUTER WORLD = 4t


So I get 7 Fourth Turning signs, versus 4 Third Turning ones. We've flipped over the edge, at least since 9/11, possibly even since E2K or the dot-com debacle. As nasty as this election and the likely post-election fallout is becoming, we're staring the Regeneracy right in the face...regardless of who ends up in the White House on January 20.

(snip)

(snip)

Look: a post nobody will disagree with:

Perhaps it's been pointed out elsewhere in these forums, but isn't high voter turnout supposed to be a 4T thing?

All the experts expect extremely high voter turnout this year...

===

OTOH, isn't the "Regeneracy" supposed to come later in a 4T? What's with the "staring Regeneracy in the face" thing?

The Presentists have another homo to hate


Another wave of bigotry shall wash our shores. Heightism and and anti- silvanism will be joined to the hatred of those who lived in caves. Oh, the humanity! :arrow: :arrow: :arrow: :cry: :cry: :cry: :arrow: :arrow: :arrow:

Originally Posted by Joseph Gradecki

Look: a post nobody will disagree with:

Perhaps it's been pointed out elsewhere in these forums, but isn't high voter turnout supposed to be a 4T thing?

All the experts expect extremely high voter turnout this year...

I don't remember reading that.

So how long has Canada been 4T? :lol:

All the usual disclaimers apply...

http://www.miami.com/mld/miamiherald...0033119.htm?1c

SARASOTA


Car aims at Katherine Harris; driver jailed


SARASOTA - (AP) -- A motorist who told police he was exercising his ''political expression'' was jailed Wednesday on an aggravated assault charge alleging he tried to run down U.S. Rep. Katherine Harris and a group of reelection campaign supporters. No one was injured.

Harris, a Sarasota Republican, told police she feared for her life and couldn't move as the vehicle sped toward her Tuesday night, police records show.

Police tracked the car's license plate number to Barry M. Seltzer, 46, of Sarasota, a registered Democrat.

''I intimidated them with my car,'' Seltzer told police. ``I was exercising my political expression. I did not run them down. I scared them a little.''

Seltzer was charged with aggravated assault with a deadly weapon and booked into the Sarasota County jail.

The first-degree felony carries a possible 30-year prison sentence. He was being held without bond and was scheduled for his first court appearance today.

Harris is seeking reelection after serving as Florida's secretary of state during the protracted 2000 presidential recount.

Maybe Da Ali G was right that we should fear terrorist attacks from trains/cars. :shock: