Things Smackie Thinks You Need to Know...

Originally posted by vansmack:

Originally posted by Venerable Bede:
the eu needs to be slapped around every so often to be reminded that brussels is not the end all-be all of power.

That's what happened in 2005. Why do it again in 2008?

i guess they didn't learn. . .

Originally posted by brennser:

the gubmint failed to properly articulate their case, the center stayed home and a rainbow coalition of the usual crackpot leftys, loonies, papists and libertarians did the rest

i guess it doesn't help when the pm who supports the measure can't even explain it himself.

Originally posted by Venerable Bede:
i guess they didn't learn. . .

Only you would argue that less than 1% of the population of Europe should have the power to impose it's will on the other 26 members.

Come to think of it, that doesn't sound like you at all.

Just what are you arguing?

hes new - still learning how to do the job :D

Originally posted by Venerable Bede:

Originally posted by brennser:

the gubmint failed to properly articulate their case, the center stayed home and a rainbow coalition of the usual crackpot leftys, loonies, papists and libertarians did the rest

i guess it doesn't help when the pm who supports the measure can't even explain it himself.

Originally posted by vansmack:

Originally posted by Venerable Bede:
i guess they didn't learn. . .

Only you would argue that less than 1% of the population of Europe should have the power to impose it's will on the other 26 members.

Come to think of it, that doesn't sound like you at all.

Just what are you arguing?

i just don't like the eu and its insane bureaucracy. . .so, any chance that it gets embarrassed (coupled with france taking over the "rotating" presidency and having to deal with this) makes me smile.

Originally posted by Venerable Bede:
i just don't like the eu and its insane bureaucracy. . .

The whole point of the treaty was to eliminate much of the bureaucracy, so you're not making sense (other than to make life hard for France, that makes perfect sense to me).

Originally posted by vansmack:

Originally posted by Venerable Bede:
i just don't like the eu and its insane bureaucracy. . .

The whole point of the treaty was to eliminate much of the bureaucracy, so you're not making sense (other than to make life hard for France, that makes perfect sense to me).

but it just makes it more difficult for the eu. . .if this treaty made that much sense, it should have been easier to defend….i think i agree, in general, with a point you made earlier- a 287 page treaty should never have been put up for a general vote in the first place. . .either simplify it (ironically, since it's supposed to simplify the eu to begin with) for a public vote, or ram it through the various parliaments so the public doesn't have a chance to reject it. the irish rules on this weren't just made up for this treaty- the negotiators knew that it would have to go before the voters, and in their smugness assumed that the people would just go along.

anyway. . .whatever benefits the treaty entailed, having the eu have to scramble to figure out how to get out of this mess is enjoyable, to me, and having it be left to the french to do that makes it doubly so.

Originally posted by Venerable Bede:
whatever benefits the treaty entailed, having the eu have to scramble to figure out how to get out of this mess is enjoyable, to me

Even if that means throwing Ireland out of the EU?

Originally posted by vansmack:

Originally posted by Venerable Bede:
whatever benefits the treaty entailed, having the eu have to scramble to figure out how to get out of this mess is enjoyable, to me

Even if that means throwing Ireland out of the EU?

ehhh, they'll figure something out.

btw, what is england doing with it???

Originally posted by Venerable Bede:
btw, what is england doing with it???

The usual.

The Torries want a referendum (because they're not in power), Labor says there's no need (because they are in power), the general population says they'd like to vote for it but it doesn't rank very high on their priority list. Fixing the National Team ranks higher.

If England were smart (and by smart I mean do they really want Tony Blair to be the first President of Europe?), Parliament would vote on it and not put it up for referendum. That's the only way Blair has a shot, seeing as how they already snubbed the currency.

After seeing what Ireland did, I doubt you see a referendum.

Originally posted by vansmack:

Originally posted by Venerable Bede:
btw, what is england doing with it???

The usual.

The Torries want a referendum (because they're not in power), Labor says there's no need (because they are in power), the general population says they'd like to vote for it but it doesn't rank very high on their priority list. Fixing the National Team ranks higher.

If England were smart (and by smart I mean do they really want Tony Blair to be the first President of Europe?), Parliament would vote on it and not put it up for referendum. That's the only way Blair has a shot, seeing as how they already snubbed the currency.

After seeing what Ireland did, I doubt you see a referendum.

i agree, after all, labour is gonna lose the next election anyway, so what do they have to lose? plus, labour knows that if it's put up for a vote, it's not going to pass.

Originally posted by vansmack:
[and by smart I mean do they really want Tony Blair to be the first President of Europe?

worlds most famous toon supporter? they should make him president of earth. sting for veep

Originally posted by Venerable Bede:
after all, labour is gonna lose the next election anyway, so what do they have to lose? plus, labour knows that if it's put up for a vote, it's not going to pass.

I disagree with both of your contentions, which is nothing new for us.

While Labour has to deal with Gordon Brown's image problem, David Cameron is not doing that much to make himself stand out. After all, Labour gets to call the next election and can time it right.

As to point 2, it won't go to a vote but if it did, the English would like nothing better than to show how intellectually superior they are to the Irish, whether they are or not. It would pass, and they would say that did because they were capable of understanding it.

I don't usually pimp my friends like this, but Melissa had me laughing on this one.

And so, I give you my "Top 10 Things Overheard At The City Hall Gay Marriage Gathering":

10. On the (rather attractive) SFPD minding the event: "I can't tell if those are real cops or gay men dressed as police."

9. To the middle-aged woman yelling, "God hates homosexuals!!": "Ugh, you need a fag hairdresser."

8. To same woman: "Get some moisturizer."

7. From the man holding the "Homo Sex is Sin" sign to a young lady engaging him in conversation: "You don't know the first thing about respect!!!"

6. "His name is Hater Smith." To a reporter who had just asked for the name of #7 (above).

5. "Gavin, will you marry me?" on a sign. Love the play on words, pal. But you'll have to get in line behind Beth.

4. To the anti-gay protesters: A rousing sing-along of "We Are The Champions."

3. To the woman holding a small rainbow-sweater-clad Chihuahua: "That may be the gayest thing here."

2. Brian Devine on the anti-gay protesters wearing hard hats with the words "Trust Jesus" on them: "If they trust Jesus, why do they need hard hats?"

1. "You need to amend your sign." Woman to protester holding a "Gays Can't Marry" sign.

--Melissa

Originally posted by vansmack:
"Top 10 Things Overheard At The City Hall Gay Marriage Gathering"

how could she have missed this one: Takai, after applying for the license: "may equality live long and prosper"

Not to point out the obvious, but she was in San Francisco and George was in West Hollywood. But I do like George's quote.

uhm… yeah. convenient change of topic: smacks, any thoughts on the development of competition in the digital music biz? i'm sure some here will poo-poo the choice of band to kick this off, but looks like the push for variable pricing is gaining steam. gotta love those one-day specials :)

Amazon cuts Coldplay album prices to bring in the crowds

Originally posted by sweetcell:
uhm… yeah. convenient change of topic: smacks, any thoughts on the development of competition in the digital music biz?

Well, first off, I'm going to get me the Brothers and Sister EP for $.99! Thanks for the link.

Yes, competition like this is good, but as usual, despite an inferior product (DRM and lower quality), Apple already won by having far superior marketing (I think they've had a commercial or two on about the new album). Count me in as one of the millions that pre-ordered Viva La Vida on iTunes to get the single.

Two things specifically about this move: It's the wrong marketing ploy for Amazon and ill timed.

They should have lowered the price before the album went on sale. Most Coldplay fans bought the album off of iTunes when you could get the early release single. That now famous Coldplay commercial advertised the album, and the single being exclusively released on iTunes (clever play of words there, it was just the single).

Amazon should have run their own series of adds countering iTunes and touting two things:

(1) It's cheaper, and
(2) It's DRM free.

What Amazon should do in the future, is adopt a policy that all new releases will be $8.99 and that the top 50 albums will also be $8.99. If nothing else, that will force Apple to lower there price and competition like that is good for the marketplace.

that brother & sister ep is over at emusic

http://www.emusic.com/album/Brothers-And-Sisters-Brothers-And-Sisters-MP3-Download/10834267.html

and lala.com is selling the new coldplay for $7.49 256VBR mp3s

you'll dig this more than anyone: http://euro2008girls.com/