Put a little Streisand on the CD player, and then visit Sadly, No! for some pictorial motivation to get out and vote for the right people tomorrow. It's inspiring!
Pharyngula
Evolution, development, and random biological ejaculations from a godless liberal
Search
Profile
PZ Myers is a biologist and associate professor at the University of Minnesota, Morris.
…and this is a pharyngula stage embryo.
• a longer profile of yours truly
• my calendar
• Nature Network
• RichardDawkins Network
• facebook
• MySpace
• Twitter
• Atheist Nexus
• the Pharyngula chat room
(#pharyngula on irc.synirc.net)
• Quick link to the latest endless thread
I reserve the right to publicly post, with full identifying information about the source, any email sent to me that contains threats of violence.
Random Quote
Religion, n: A daughter of Hope and Fear, explaining to Ignorance the Nature of the Unknowable.
[Ambrose Bierce, The Devil's Dictionary, 1911]
Recent Posts
- You shoulda been here
- Friday Cephalopod: Squink!
- A contemptible pseudoscientific scam
- KKMS, always quick to defend the fools
- The problem of the oblivious white male atheist
- You've all forgotten about the Molly awards, haven't you?
- Skepticon II
- Did you get a copy of The Origin from Ray Comfort?
- I get email
- If I were called Rusty Thomas, I might overcompensate a bit, too
A Taste of Pharyngula
Recent Comments
- caseywollberg on You shoulda been here
- PixelFish on Escape from the planet of the cursed undead heart of the vengeful bride of the son of the thread that will not die!
- 'Tis Himself, OM on I get email
- GregMusings on The problem of the oblivious white male atheist
- Ol' Greg on The problem of the oblivious white male atheist
- chrisD on You shoulda been here
- MAJeff, OM on The problem of the oblivious white male atheist
- Lynna on Escape from the planet of the cursed undead heart of the vengeful bride of the son of the thread that will not die!
- Haley on The problem of the oblivious white male atheist
- 'Tis Himself, OM on You shoulda been here
Archives
- November 2009
- October 2009
- September 2009
- August 2009
- July 2009
- June 2009
- May 2009
- April 2009
- March 2009
- February 2009
- January 2009
- December 2008
- November 2008
- October 2008
- September 2008
- August 2008
- July 2008
- June 2008
- May 2008
- April 2008
- March 2008
- February 2008
- January 2008
- December 2007
- November 2007
- October 2007
- September 2007
- August 2007
- July 2007
- June 2007
- May 2007
- April 2007
- March 2007
- February 2007
- January 2007
- December 2006
- November 2006
- October 2006
- September 2006
- August 2006
- July 2006
- June 2006
- May 2006
- April 2006
- March 2006
- February 2006
- January 2006
- November 2001
Blogroll
Other Information
« Everybody cool it—this is a party, not a brawl | Main | Well, well, Wells: Jonathan Wells reacts »
Getting in the mood to VOTE!
Category: Humor • Politics
Posted on: November 6, 2006 9:35 PM, by PZ Myers
Share this: Facebook Twitter Stumbleupon Reddit Email + More
TrackBacks
TrackBack URL for this entry: http://scienceblogs.com/mt/pings/25249
Sign in or register with TypePad. Sign up with Movable Type.
Comments
Posted by: afterthought | November 6, 2006 9:59 PM
Yes to Sadly, No! as there are some pictures we should never forget. I'm not a big Streisand fan, but I can relate anyway.
Liz Phair for me.
Posted by: craig | November 6, 2006 10:44 PM
Just got back from the grocery store. The cashier was bouncing off the wall with energy and all antsy (more so than she usually is). Really manic. I asked her what was up and she said "I just can't wait for tomorrow! I'm so excited."
She whispered "I'm a Democrat."
This is Florida. You have to whisper that here.
Posted by: AndyS | November 6, 2006 10:59 PM
The pics are a great motivator. Time for a change.
Posted by: plunge | November 6, 2006 11:39 PM
I've been in PA-08 for the final stretch. I hate polls and predictions, but let me just say that if nothing else, having the state of Ohio elect not just one statewide Democrat for the first time since John Glenn retired, but what's looking like a complete SWEEP of the state, is just fantastic.
Likewise, we may be on the cusp of having no more Santorum.
And if we're lucky, no more George Allen either.
I do hope we take back the House, and I do hope that Wetterling wins, but if she doesn't despite any Democratic wave in general, I get to say I told you so, okay?
Goodnight folks. Let's hope America can make it a good evening tommorow night.
Posted by: anomalous4 | November 7, 2006 12:49 AM
I almost cried. Now all we have to do is get through one more day, and hopefully we can wake up on Wednesday morning and leave some of those bad dreams behind............
Just the usual 2 brass farthings' worth from a Godly Liberal (yes, there are more of us out here than you might think!)
Posted by: Potter | November 7, 2006 2:44 AM
http://news.independent.co.uk/environment/article1956568.ece
Europe moves to give equal rights to our eight-legged overloards!
I'm awful tired or I would write more.
Love.
Potter
Posted by: bernarda | November 7, 2006 3:29 AM
What makes Bush run? The Bush pilot.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xhqKoqqS0XI&mode=related&search=
Another classic picture of Bush.
http://www.dailyhaha.com/_pics/geroge_bush_eats_kitties.htm
Posted by: Loren Petrich | November 7, 2006 3:47 AM
I already voted by mail; I voted yellow-dog Democrat.
I'm still worried that the Republicans will steal the election, however. Judging from the polls over at electoral-vote.com -- it takes changing from Democrat to Republican only 1% of the Senate vote and 3% of the House vote to do it. Alternatively, that could be done by suppressing the Democratic vote: 2% for the Senate and 6% for the House.
Posted by: Lab Lemming | November 7, 2006 4:32 AM
The best ticket is a split ticket.
Unless, of course, everyone splits in opposite ways...
Posted by: G. Tingey | November 7, 2006 4:42 AM
What makes anyone think, that even if among the minority who actually VOTE, a majority vote "Dem" that any difference will be made?
After all, you've got all these nice new controlled snazzy voting machines, which can be garuanteed to give the "right" result......
Herer, we still use paper and "X's" - and it is much more reliable.
Posted by: Peter Barber | November 7, 2006 4:57 AM
Here's a comment from political analyst Thomas Mann - er, didn't he write The Magic Mountain? - of the Brookings Institution quoted in The Guardian:
I'm afraid that for many people in Britain and the rest of Europe, these questions raised their ugly heads in 2004. If the Democrats fail to take both the Senate and the House tomorrow, we will have our answer.
Whether it happened because of a supine US media, or tactical errors by the Democrats, or poor choice offered by a two-party system, or simply out-and-out electoral fraud, wouldn't matter. Most Europeans already regard the USA with suspicion, and find it hard to believe that a well-informed person would vote for the Republicans' disastrous foreign policy, let alone their disdain for science, the environment, due legal process, reproductive and gay rights, church-state separation...
In summary:
THEY'RE COMPLETE NUTTERS! PLEASE, WE'RE BEGGING YOU - GET RID OF THEM!
Posted by: G. Tingey | November 7, 2006 7:09 AM
But, with people being "accidentally" removed from voters lists, and probably-rigged voting machines -
YOU WAN'T BE ABLE TO GET RID OF THEM.
Posted by: Peter Barber | November 7, 2006 7:24 AM
G. Tingey:
Have you read this article at Common Dreams? Depressing stuff from a J.D. and former election monitor.
- Oh, yes, and the other advantage of the paper ballot is that if you can't bring yourself to support any of the candidates, you can write or draw something witty (or rude) on it. Admittedly it is officially classed as a spoiled ballot, but you'll give the monitors and counters a laugh! Bet you can't do that with a late-model Diebold, huh?
Posted by: bernarda | November 7, 2006 8:09 AM
If the criminals come out on top again, here is why: electronic voting. Hacking Democracy.
http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-7236791207107726851&q=hacking+democracy
Posted by: Caledonian | November 7, 2006 8:16 AM
Yeah, that's it. It can't possibly be because half of Americans actually like the criminals.
Posted by: T_U_T | November 7, 2006 10:32 AM
Does bernarda conclude that the elections are rigged, because she can not have true that more than half of americans like those nutjobs, or do you conclude that more than half of americans vote them because you can not have true that the elections could be rigged ?
Posted by: Keith Douglas | November 7, 2006 3:16 PM
I have concluded that either Diebold is utterly incompetent or incredibly malicious. This is not to say they deliberately stole the election as in gave votes to candidates that did not earn them. Rather, I would think that there is a possibility that they would work to discourage voting by making it look futile by making lousy machines.
That said - vote, my American colleagues.
Posted by: bernarda | November 7, 2006 3:17 PM
Of course neither of these wingnuts has anything to say about the issue. A wingnut who knew his bottom orifice from a hole in the ground would be a real find.
Posted by: Nix | November 7, 2006 4:25 PM
Keith, you're being insufficiently cynical.
Diebold are *both* utterly incompetent *and* incredibly malicious. (I'm just hoping that their malign attributes will cancel each other out to some extent. It'd be mildly amusing if some Republicans got negative numbers of votes this time around, because their vote-rigging software is as badly written as everything else in their crappy voting machines.)