Comments on: almost back; thanks to the Governor https://archives.lessig.org/?p=2287 2002-2015 Sat, 31 Jan 2004 01:46:44 +0000 hourly 1 https://wordpress.org/?v=5.7.2 By: Ganga Na https://archives.lessig.org/?p=2287#comment-2855 Sat, 31 Jan 2004 01:46:44 +0000 http://lessig.org/blog/2003/07/almost_back_thanks_to_the_gove.html#comment-2855 al sharpton is definitely the best black candidate in the race, and that definitely goes to show how much our society has progressed since the exodus, but this is why you should vote for Bush even if you are a Democrat. if a democratic candidate wins in ’04 then Hillary Clinton cannot run in ’08 unless the democratic president that wins fails miserably in some way. i think i would much rather have a historic event that has had no precedent like a women president to happen, which is why even democrats should vote for george bush in ’04, so that hillary clinton can run and win in ’08. if there is anyone who should be the first women president in the history of the united states it should be hillary clinton. imagine all the women in this country who could vicariously live through that achievement, especially those who have had unfaithful husbands. i would bet that if george bush were to win in ’04 and knowing that hillary would probably run and win in ’08, he would have the country and the rest of the world running excellently and even spit-shined as any good cowboy would for a lady.

-(~)

]]>
By: J.B. Nicholson-Owens https://archives.lessig.org/?p=2287#comment-2854 Tue, 06 Jan 2004 20:49:03 +0000 http://lessig.org/blog/2003/07/almost_back_thanks_to_the_gove.html#comment-2854 In scanning the other posts in this thread, I came across Jack Kessler’s response about an earlier point of mine being “preconceived”. I think that’s a shameful and intellectually lazy way to respond to someone’s comment. It reminds me of the hasty dismissal people intend when they say “that’s a conspiracy theory”–both are attempts to shut down uncomfortable conversation that without ever saying precisely how it is disagreeable.

]]>
By: J.B. Nicholson-Owens https://archives.lessig.org/?p=2287#comment-2853 Tue, 06 Jan 2004 20:34:54 +0000 http://lessig.org/blog/2003/07/almost_back_thanks_to_the_gove.html#comment-2853 Dean just confirmed in the most recent Democratic party debate that if you want universal single-payer health care he’s not the candidate for you. Vote for Kucinich instead, because he’s got an actual plan on the table (HR676 which you can read about at thomas.loc.gov). On this major issue, Dean is yet another corporate-friendly Democrat who wants to keep the HMOs happy and spread the line that America can’t have what other countries (under far worse financial situations, in some cases) set up for themselves.

]]>
By: Anonymous https://archives.lessig.org/?p=2287#comment-2852 Tue, 30 Sep 2003 01:30:31 +0000 http://lessig.org/blog/2003/07/almost_back_thanks_to_the_gove.html#comment-2852 I listened to Govenor Dean on Talk of the Nation.It really seems like he has got a lot of good ideas.I would surely back him,except for one issue.Same sex unions.I am a Christian and a Baptist preacher.For that fact and that fact only,I will preach and write to every Christian organization that will listen to oppose him.It’s time this nation stands up for what made us a great nation and that is God and the Bible.Our Four Fathers realized it.Lets just see how important the Christian vote is.

]]>
By: J.B. Nicholson-Owens https://archives.lessig.org/?p=2287#comment-2851 Sun, 17 Aug 2003 08:05:22 +0000 http://lessig.org/blog/2003/07/almost_back_thanks_to_the_gove.html#comment-2851 Jack Kessler wrote:

Pretty good anti-Dean firestorm, running here�

I think it is a crowd of people who want to talk copyright (and related issues) and got virtually nothing from Dean. There’s nothing “anti-Internet” here either (as if people here would bother continuing to participate on Lessig’s blog if they are somehow against the Internet).

On �radio or TV�?� How do you �interact� using a radio, or a TV?�

Call-in shows, submitting e-mail, and showing up to participate in person are three that come to mind for me (two of which I’ve done myself). But getting back to the topic of blogging: Dean didn’t take advantage of the lead time this medium affords nor did he respond to topical points made by others. This, for me, helped set up an atmosphere where I didn’t want to participate because I have better things to do than get stump speech reruns.

Dean had no idea whatsoever of what he was getting into, here. The guy is 54 years old. He went to medical school…

It is usually considered unwise for a politician to enter a conversation with informed participants where the politician knows they have nothing to add. Dean didn’t give us his time and clearly indicate what he was learning from the experience here. Kucinich, by comparison is doing better in giving feedback that is topical (for *this* blog).

Ask any 54-year-old. I wonder how much �blogging� George Bush has done�

I don’t care how much blogging Bush has done because Bush wasn’t the one to volunteer here and then flub it (according to the responses I’m seeing in this thread).

You missed the point of �Dean�s visit�, I think. This is the first time that I ever have corresponded directly with a Presidential candidate. When was the last time that _you_ did?

I didn’t get the chance to do so here during Dean’s visit. Apparently others tried to and didn’t get that feedback either, a number of them have posted their disappointment with Dean’s responses in this thread.

You give up easily. If these issues interested you, why didn�t you raise them?

I don’t give up easily, as I have already addressed, I prioritize. Others did raise them repeatedly and they got no response from Dean.

This statement seems clever, but sounds preconceived and is not really relevant.

Recalling Linda Richmond’s signature digressions succinctly characterizes the jarring off-topicness and lack of conversational participation Dean exhibited on this blog. It is hardly preconceived, I was looking to learn more about Dean with regard to copyright issues, as I pointed out in a previous post.

You are saying that the public doesn�t participate in blogs because the public doesn�t participate in blogs�

No, I clearly did not say that.

At the end of the week, I did not learn where Dean stands on issues relevant to discuss in this blog–issues I care about and consider when I vote.

]]>
By: Anonymous https://archives.lessig.org/?p=2287#comment-2850 Sat, 02 Aug 2003 19:10:52 +0000 http://lessig.org/blog/2003/07/almost_back_thanks_to_the_gove.html#comment-2850 Good comments.

]]>
By: Karl https://archives.lessig.org/?p=2287#comment-2849 Tue, 29 Jul 2003 16:17:06 +0000 http://lessig.org/blog/2003/07/almost_back_thanks_to_the_gove.html#comment-2849 Re: the purple fern. It appears to be some sort of symbol for the law school. It appears on their homepage behind the words Stanford Law School.

-kd

]]>
By: Lee Kane https://archives.lessig.org/?p=2287#comment-2848 Tue, 29 Jul 2003 02:32:32 +0000 http://lessig.org/blog/2003/07/almost_back_thanks_to_the_gove.html#comment-2848 Yes, Lisa–Simply because people read a blog and consider voting does not also make them sheep ready to bleat abject thanks because Dean simply showed up. Little of substance beyond the usual was said. Generic pablum was put forth. No issues relevant to this blog were addressed substantively. Is this a reason to froth? No, but people should call it like they read it and they’ve done so. Others have had more generous opinions and that’s fine too.

PS. Why does Lessig have a purple fern in the corner of his blog?

]]>
By: Karl https://archives.lessig.org/?p=2287#comment-2847 Mon, 28 Jul 2003 18:12:59 +0000 http://lessig.org/blog/2003/07/almost_back_thanks_to_the_gove.html#comment-2847 “I�m sorry Dean�s precious time was wasted on some of the people here who clearly believe their own agendas are far more important…”

That’s just it, Lisa…Dean didn’t spend any ‘precious time’ on this blog. All he did was use it as a mirror of his own for a week. He made no attempt to address the issues this blog exists for, and his campaign handlers insulted our intelligence on at least one occasion by posting in his name. I’ll say it again, it was pap.

-kd

]]>
By: Lee Kane https://archives.lessig.org/?p=2287#comment-2846 Sun, 27 Jul 2003 11:49:20 +0000 http://lessig.org/blog/2003/07/almost_back_thanks_to_the_gove.html#comment-2846 This is strange. I’d heard about Dean’s guest blogging and then, just now, I read Larry’s own summation of the week of Dean blogging in which he talks about how great it was and how one blog is worth a dozen town hall meetings or some such. And then I scrolled down and read the posts and, well, what’s the big deal? Dean posted a couple of times, beat the same horses he always beats in the same made-for-tv language all candidates use: no more insight or information presented, nothing more than what I’d get in about 2 minutes of watching Dean be interviewed on a Sunday morning talk show. I daresay a townhall would have given me more! Now, this is to be expected: running for president is not an idle occupation, leaving one time to blog: especially when every word one says/writes must be carefully reviewed with an eye toward its implications, etc. So anyways–conceptually the guest blog was ultra cool. Practically, well, I’m sorry. Anyway, non-partisan 2 cents.

]]>