I've just posted a new image update with 2,465 new pictures (everything that was submitted before about noon today). Thanks to all the contributors, and to Steelhawk for being the cover model (work by The Fog) — come on — how could I not put that on the cover? Anyway, new stuff in BME/shop as well:
From: Curtis
Subject: BME/risksdo you have any other photos of girls taking risk like the one pictured. that is a beautiful photo and a wonderful risk.
Oh baby.
Oh baby.
BME/Risks ≠ BME/HARD.
The rest of this entry is politics.
Not having been born at the time, I'm not quite old enough to remember when in 1968 Pan-Am announced that it was beginning to take reservations for moon vacations, and ultimately took nearly a hundred thousand reservations (Rachel and I are already on the list over at Virgin Galactic for early flights). Although neither ever managed it, TWA as well announced similar plans… Even if you're too young to remember any of this, surely you remember seeing the Pan-Am ships in 2001: A Space Odyssey, taking leisurely trips to orbiting and moon stations.
And the best thing about this new age of space travel? The drinks!
Besides, Lynn is enthusiastic about antimatter because he believes it could propel futuristic space rockets."I think," he said, "we need to get off this planet, because I'm afraid we're going to destroy it."
Yeah, an anti-matter rocket exploding on the launch pad sounds just great. Remind me again where I put that Pan Galactic Gargle Blaster?
Onward now to the overstated: It was suggested in my whatever forum (as it has been elsewhere) that casting a vote for a third party (like Badnarik and the LP) is “wasting your vote” because they're not fielding a “real” Presidential candidate, but are rather trying to just get their voice heard in the national debates. Let me propose that the purpose of voting is not singularly to have “your guy” elected — the purpose of voting is to institute political change that you feel is positive.
If you buy the “anyone but Bush” or “lesser of two evils” type argument, let's take a look at what you're doing in the context of the above definition. By voting for a “lesser of two evils”, you are voting for — as you put it — for something you know is evil. Your vote will not institute positive political change, as much as it stops some “evil” in your mind. You will literally be voting for a system you hate and a leader you don't want — if anything is “wasting a vote”, by definition, that's it.
If on the other hand disgruntled independents and Republicans vote for someone who they can believe in on an idealistic level, like Badnarik, they're voting for something they can actually support with a clear conscience. It's true that the next President — nor quite likely any President in the foreseeable future, it is a real possibility that a party like the Libertarian Party could get enough votes to swing the Republican party back to honorable and American ways, and maybe even get itself into the mainstream televised debate — either of these outcomes, while not selecting a President, will have a real effect on politics.
So… what's really wasting a vote?
Voting to empower a President you don't want, or voting to empower politics that you do want?
What's that you say? It didn't work in the last US election? Maybe not, but it's worked in many countries around the world, and American's “two one party system” is a modern change brought about by massive corporate cartels — it's not the way things have always been in America, and it's not the way they always are going to be. Remember, just because you don't succeed at something the first time you try, doens't mean you should quit. Some victories are more difficult to win than others, but those that are the hardest are often the most important.
That said, if Kerry doesn't get elected, we're all fucked.
Post a Comment