Puzzle Description Suppressed:Click below to view spoilers

#1: Minnie Fuerstnau (m.fuerstnau) on Apr 29, 2008

Sleepy and cross-eyed! Thanks for a colorful puzzle.

Nice image.

You must mean: "your getting sleepy today."
fun puzzle.

I breathed a huge sigh of relief when I realized that this wasn't yet another American flag.

If we're correcting grammar, it is actually: you're getting sleepy today... but it didn't make me sleepy

I was about to say been there done that since it started out like so many pattern puzzle already on the site but then the red touch make it nice ( but still very easy) plus it was not a us flag.

God bless this puzzle for not being another America symbol ( just kidding no need to put my picture at the border with a Shoot on sight banner) ( Anyway not that I'll consider moving down south to the land of injustice an the opressor way ( just kidding again I think I' m really pushing my luck tonight, but that just me a good old Quebecer enjoying freedom of speech.)
Freedom of Speech... do you still got that my dear neibour... ( ok that was the last one)

By the way Nancy,Gypso, JC and all my dear americans friends you'll have to protect me again the nasty others....:)

What got into me tonight....

They say we have freedom of speech, but just try to say something that isn't "Politically correct" or speak your mind on the "illegal aliens" or "I'm tired of Spanish overtaking the English language here" and watch what happens!
Now MY picture will be up on the shoot on site poster!

Freedom of speech doesn't mean that people have to listen politely when you talk. They are free to disagree as loudly and emphatically as they like. That's part of freedom of speech too.

In it's narrow sense, freedom of speech means that the government can't jail you for your opinions. More broadly it means that people can't slug you or threaten you and your boss can't fire you.

I think freedom of speech in America is still in fairly good shape, though there are some Patriot Act kind of stuff that I think we should lose and, much as I'd like to see money have less influence on politics, some of the campaign finance reform stuff has uncomfortable free speech implications.

The electorial system definitely needs work. Most recently I'm been rather annoyed to have been denied a chance to vote in the Democratic primary. But that's mostly 200 year old problems that are just getting more attention lately. Maybe the attention is actually going to lead to steps in the right direction.

One of the parts of democracy in America where I see the biggest decline is the increasing power of the executive branch compared especially to the legislative branch. That's really where I put most of the blame for the Iraq war. The constitution was explicitly written to ensure that a small set of stupid people in the white house could NOT take the country to the war. You need approval from the legislative branch. But the legislative branch has gotten in the habit just rubber stamping things like that, giving the president blanket approval to just do whatever he deems necessary. If any reasonably diverse body of reasonably intelligent and informed people had taking a week or two to debate whether this war was a good idea, then there would have been no way it would have happened. The legislative branch has, however, almost ceased to function as a body of debate, and the presidency has been gaining more and more power. It's not good. It makes our government stupider. And the whole world needs a non-stupid America in the coming decades.

The even bigger threat is the growing imbalance of wealth int the country. They income gap between rich and poor is growing rapidly. The worse that gets, the more democracy will turn into a sham performed for the entertainment of the masses while the elite does as they please.

wow Jan tank for your elaborate and instructive point-of-view, that what I like most about this web site. I just wrote a joke on the US 3 post earlier and now we having a real conversation about the political situation of the USA.

That remember me of another puzzle on a grave that start a conversation about our respective children name.

Truly this place is a commun place to people with intelignet and interesting opinion.

Ditto what Jan said. :)

Thanks Person!

I used to be a professor. The least provocation still inspires me to lecture.

keep on lecturing us Jan its always a great educational,fun and interesting read.

I was confused and dismayed when we went to war so fast without any input from the ordinary citizen. I didn't believe that could, much less would happen.

I especially disliked the foolish posturing of our president a few months later on that naval aircraft carrier, donning a uniform like a costume. What a travesty for real soldiers and patriots to view and bear.

Over these ensuing six years I have shed many tears both angry and sorrowful over the unnecessary/worthless death and destruction a few in our nation were willing to cause in return for leverage and wealth.

How George Bush and his cronies can sleep at night is beyond me. How our nation could re-elect a man like that is even more mystifying to me...smacks of vote/voter machination(s).

How long will it take for us to rid ourselves of that shameful Patriot Act? How anyone who has any care at all for our nation can believe that hanging the word "patriot" on an illegal, unconstitutional act makes it right...absolutely shakes me to my soul. So much of what I believe and trust about America can be obliterated in such a short time. It has given me a taste of how helpless people must feel in countries where "liberty" has long only been a word. It scares me much much more than the events and ramifications of 9/11. Would that cooler, more intelligent and reasonable heads prevailed.

We face such a enormous task in the years ahead, now, more than ever we need a proven leader with experience, integrity, strength and unflagging commitment to the poor and middle class. A leader who can command the respect of the world's leaders once again while forging a domestic policy that is going to be hard to accomplish...I fear it isn't to be.

And now I will get off my soap box. I am reasonably sure that very few will go back to redo this puzzle so no one will read this ramble and rant, so I will let it stand. What began as a comment exploded into letting off some steam I had no idea was building up...I don't usually share these ideas online because it doesn't help anything and might set someone else off. Sigh. I don't even know if I feel any better for having said what I did. I'm still so very very disillusioned and pessimistic about the next 20 years, cleaning up after the Bush administration.

I am also disappointed Hillary Clinton won't be given her chance to serve in the White House...and believe me, I've listened to and weighed the politicians all, over and over and over again. I don't understand why people don't see her as outstanding...but then, it never occurred to me that George Bush would even be a viable candidate, much less the electee his first term...and certainly not the second. What do I know? lol...and that lol is slightly tinged with bitterness lol...the second not, it's merely rueful...lol...and that one is a shake back to reality. A sense of humor is the only thing that keeps me going some of these days.

I will be happy if Hillary Doesn't become president..she ran her husbands term & look how that turned out

just my opinion :)

*sigh*

Yeah, look how that turned out.

Family and Medical Leave Act. NAFTA. The Brady Bill requiring a five day waiting period to purchase a handgun. Working with the UN weapon inspectors to eliminate weapons of mass destruction from Iraq. Military intervention in Yugoslavia aimed at ending ethnic cleansing, ending with a handover to UN forces. Putting together the Oslo accords, the first direct face-to-face agreement between Israel and the Palestinians. Declassified more documents than any previous or subsequent administration and classified fewer. Ends his term in office with the first (and last) budget surplus the US has seen in a long time.

So what part of that am I supposed to think was a disaster? Or am I supposed to believe that Hillary was the brains behind the Monica Lewinsky affair?

Comment Suppressed:Click below to view spoilers

hypnotic suggestions.. lol

I don't actually think Bill was a great president. He was a competent one. He didn't screw up the country. I'm actually a lot more impressed with the first George Bush though I'm not a Republican. Bush senior happened to be on the job when America was facing a very tricky transition: the break-up of the Soviet Union. Bush senior didn't bring that about, but he did keep the boat from rocking while it was happening, and he developed a promising new stance for post-cold war America, one in which America works as a leader among nations. His handling of the first Iraq war was perfect: go in thoughtfully, with a real international coalition, do the job, get out. The best that you can say for Bill Clinton's foreign policy is that he clove to the line that Bush senior had established. Not that you could ask for much more than that. It was a good line.

And then Bush junior came along with new ideas about American global supremacy and obliterated his father's best legacy.

So America could do worse that go back to Clinton (assuming Hillary isn't hiding a secret urge to obliterate Bill's legacy), but I really think we need more than that. America is facing a list of problems, including global warming and terrorism, which urgently need to be dealt with and which are not really American problems but world problems. Our only hope for addressing them is to achieve unprecidently high levels of global cooperation and trust between nations. Bush junior's legacy needs to be undone, and rapid progress in the opposite direction is needed.

I think of the three candidates left in the running, Obama probably has the best chance of doing this. He seems like a guy who doesn't lose track of the big picture in the face of short term political problems. But he's totally inexperienced, and I have no idea how he will really work out.

LOL Alaris! Me too!

I've been an admirer of Gore since before he was even a presidential candidate, because of the Internet thing. Back when the Internet was pretty much only a thing universities used, Gore looked at it and decided it was something that should stretch into every school and home in the country, and decided to actively and aggressively campaign for that. I thought the whole idea was a bit nutso. I mean the net was cool for university folks, but would my mom really want to use it? But there he was, advocating for an "information superhighway". Neat that an actual senator actually seemed to kind of understand what was going on, and might even be able to steer some research funding our way, but he seemed a bit of a fruitcake. In retrospect, I guess he understood the importance of the Internet sooner and better than I did.

The whole Internet theme of empowering people by getting information to them has been a lifelong thing with him. The business I mentioned above about the Clinton administration declassifying all sorts of stuff was really a pet project of vice president Gore. He thought the government ought to have as few secrets as possible. (Bush's administration has directed the various agencies to classify anything and everything that they can think of any excuse to classify, and deny as many FOIA requests as possible. The Bushies love having secrets.)

You'd think that in the 2000 campaign it would have counted for something that Gore had a record as being the first and most prominent government advocate of what turned out to be a major new economic sector for the nation, a major force for free speech and liberty, and a major unifier for the people of the world. I mean, if that's not visionary leadership, what is? But nope. He manages to fumble that so badly that it actually turns out to be a liability ("Al Gore invented the Internet"). His whole long record of leadership and service comes out looking like self-aggrandizing baloney, compared to his aw-shucks opponent who never did nothing and is proud of it, and the best Al can pull off is a tie. The guy's a terrific leader and visionary. Too bad he's such a mediocre politician.

After that election, I thought we'd never see him again. But, surprise, he bounced back, doing what he does best. The oil companies had raised a big cloud of FUD over the global warming issue, and Al Gore blew it away by making a movie in which he stands in front of charts explaining results of scientific studies. The power of information. If he could sell HIMSELF that effectively, he might be able to win an election.

So, if he ran again, I'd vote for him, but I'm not sure much of anyone else would. Maybe Obama will select him as VP or give him an appropriate cabinet post, but Gore's already proven that he can still be a visionary leader without needing to hold any office to lead from. Maybe that's the role he can do the most in.

Each presidential candidate has their good & bad points, unfortunately mostly bad. There isn't a candidate out there worthy to be our President, one we could Respect, Trust, be Proud of & stand behind 100%. It would be so nice if there was a candidate that was in there for the PEOPLE instead of their own personal gain.. One that everyone would say "YES..That's the one we need to turn us back into a Proud & Honorable Nation".

Land of the Free

Politics & Religion..the most debated subjects around

(is debated the correct word?)

I think it is the right word. And its definately true.

Wow. This was one long political debate and I still don't want to vote for anyone. Yes, I don't like Bush's administration, but I also didn't like Clinton and didn't want Hilary. Nor do I like McCain or Obama... Sigh...
I think I'll write in Oprah. lol

Oh! Please not Oprah! Mickey Mouse is a better choice than that! ;)

It's a sad statement but it seems to me that I have mostly voted (with a couple of exceptions) defensively. Not for a candidate I really believed in but in an effort to keep out the one I really didn't like.

Telly! Dean-ah! How about writing in Craig Ferguson?

Well he's British...! What about a 3rd party candidate? He won't win, but you're making a statement at least. Better than not voting.

Oh no Arduinna! And here you are, on the brink of visiting his homeland!!
Craig Ferguson is a Scotsman. :-D

I'm very hopeful for a semi-viable 3rd party candidate... It's the only hope I have. I absolutely will not NOT vote... so I gotta hope that that someone appears which my conscience won't object to. *sigh*

I don't know, I sometimes don't vote if I don't feel strongly about either candidate and am willing to leave it to those who do, but that NEVER happens in a presidential election.

If you can't decide if you like McCain or Obama, decide if you'll like the three supreme court justices McCain will (probably) appoint more than the three Obama will appoint. Sometimes that's easier.

Sometimes I just think that I could never vote for a person insane enough to WANT to be president.

Good point Jan. supreme court justices usually outlast presidencies by FAR and have a much greater impact on our everyday lives through the decisions they make.

Gypso, I knew that! And I did say BRITISH, not ENGLISH. Though I know the Scottish scoff at the name "Great Britain." Craig Ferguson actually had a hilarious role on an episode of my very, very favorite sci-fi comedy, Red Dwarf.

When I was in Scotland last time, I had a gentleman come up to me at the train station and ask me if I was American (after listening to me speak). He was obviously baiting me, because after I said yes, he said, "No you're not. You're United Statesian." Everyone from Canada to Argentina is "American," North or South. I don't know if he was trying to start an argument, but I just smiled and said that it was fine with me to be United Statesian, or Oklahoman if he wanted me to be more specific.

I am crazy over Craig Ferguson. Ask my family. We were lucky enough in March to catch him locally in San Francisco. Be still my heart.

Craig also happens to be one of those Scotsmen who visually bristles at being called British or English and is not shy to explain his distaste of the confusion. Scottish or British, he is still ineligible to run for U.S. president. Oh well, our loss.

Arduinna, did you happen to see his movie "Saving Grace"? It's very sweet and funny. :-)

I haven't. I'll have to queue it! He's my favorite if I stay up late enough to watch the late night talkers. I laugh all through his intro bits.

Ah BG! You are a woman after my own heart. :-)

lol Judy. Maybe that'll help me decide Jan, cuz like Gypso, many times I've voted for someone just because I really disliked the other candidate. In this election. I don't hate/love either.
I too think Craig Ferguson is hilarious.

Supreme Court Justice is my overriding factor, It has really been helpful a few times. Thanks Jan for pointing that out.

Telly! Want to start a Ferguson fan club with Arduinna and me?

Yeah! Craigie! Half an hour for me now!

No fair Arduinna! You get to see him before I do! ;-)

Sure Gypso...hey, when/where can I catch that show anyway?

Telly, he's on CBS late night following David Letterman. His opening monologue alone is worth the loss of sleep. :-D

Ok. I stay up late anyway. :)

Comment Suppressed:Click below to view hints

Comment Suppressed:Click below to view hints and spoilers

I respectfully disagree with everything in response #48. Or more precisely, I consider everything there 20% true and 80% hooey.

I was starting to think I was the only one on this site that wasn't for Clinton. thanks Ergodyne (I am not alone anymore)

I too am definitely not for Clinton.

For some reason I am quite fond of the word hooey today. Thanks Jan.

Reading back through this, I see various people bemoaning again at how all the candidates stink and none of them are really worthy of being president.

I'm trying to imagine what kind of person people have in mind when they have in mind as an ideal presidential candidate. How about a guy has a reputation as a orator but who never spent more than 18 months in school over his whole life, whose only prior political experience was one undistinguished term in the house of representatives where he was so unpopular that he didn't even try to get re-elected? It's hard to imagine a hopelessly unqualified guy like Abraham Lincoln even being nominated these days.

But even presidential candidates are human beings, not matinee heroes. All of them are ambitious. All of them have made hard compromises in a complex world. All have made blunders. None of them have all that much relevant experience, because there really aren't all that many jobs that are adequate preparation for the presidency of the United States, unless you want to hire a former British Prime Minister for the job.

I think both parties have put forth very creditable candidates this year, men and women very much worthy of respect (by human being standards, not movie superhero standards). It's hard to tell in advance how well they will function in the oval office, but either one will be a huge improvement over the current fellow (who, admittedly, has mostly stopped making major, nation-busting blunders in the last year or so).

For me the choice between them is simple. Obama is going to take the country in a direction that more nearly matches my values than McCain, and he will appoint supreme court justices who will do so too. Like me, he is a former professor (of Constitutional Law, a subject I think every president could stand to know well), and he still shows signs of a professorial way of thinking - of carefully analyzing pros and cons of all sides of a question, of being sensitive to different opinions, and of seeking fresh solutions to problems. He's got some pragmatic problem solving abilities, but he doesn't take his idealism off the table. He has the capacity to be an inspiring leader. I'd think his administration would be a bit slow moving, but would reach for some real, long-term improvements in important areas.

McCain knows everything there is to know about Washington politics, and every move he makes is shaped by it. Half the time he plays entirely along, and the rest of the time he thumbs his nose at it and does something completely perpendicular. He's pretty good at seeing through all the malarkey thrown into the air by people to further their agendas, and can cut through it all when he feels those interests are not the nations interest, or adopt it wholesale if he thinks it is in his interest. He can be short tempered and unpredictable. His supreme court appointments might not be as bad as one would think, because he loves other "mavericks", as we saw in his choice for vice president. Probably a lot of them will be appointed in his administration, and it will make for interesting times.

Two very different people, but both good candidates. Our country is lucky to have them.

Ok, true. They're both not evil, just not ideal. I was just hoping for a candidate who'd kinda jump out as the one I want to be in charge. The truth is, they both seem "gray" on a few issues I believe in. So I just have to choose the best out of them...the one who aligns best.

Comment Suppressed:Click below to view spoilers

Comment Suppressed:Click below to view hints

Show: Hints | Spoilers | Both

Goto next topic

You must register and log in to be able to participate in this discussion.