Even the most casual observer of U.S. politics notices that The Debate, whatever The Debate may be, rarely ever ends. Long after the votes are counted, after the Supreme Court issues its decision, after all but the faithful few have ceased to care, The Debate continues.

Why would we want it?

Cracked.com has an article up on the dehumanization of unfamiliar individuals in a global society.

No, really. I'm serious.

Typical of the writing style on Cracked, it's not safe for work. But it is a surprisingly thoughtful, and unsurprisingly profane, look into the human psyche.

David Boaz over at Cato correctly identifies the general solution, private property rights, to the over-fishing problem that plagues our oceans. What Mr. Boaz leaves mostly unsaid, with the exception of a few links to websites supporting the extremely flawed Individual Transferable Quota (ITQ) system, is a practical private property solution to the tragedy of the commons as it pertains to our oceans.

Mr. Boaz asks “…how do you create private ownership in fish or sharks or sea turtles that can easily move through vast and unfenced bodies of water?” On the surface it seems to be an insolvable problem. The Federal Government currently has nominal ownership, insofar as it has the power to set quotas and grant fishing licenses, the sale of which, in theory if not always in reality, goes towards maintaining the fisheries. But of course, it is in the realm of reality where the tragedy of the commons rears its ugly head. In theory, the Federal Government, the all-powerful Big Brother which liberals so dearly love and uphold as reflecting the Common Will of the People, would impartially count the fish, determine how many could be sustainably harvested, set quotas and sell fishing licenses, and use the proceeds to maintain the fisheries for the future benefit of the American People. Let’s bask in the glow and breathe in the fresh air of that Utopia for a moment, shall we?...

An election on a site with the motto "classical debate and the occasional bloodletting" should bring out the long knives, no matter how civil we want this place to be the other ninety-nine percent of the time. Elections decide the direction that the community will go in. What direction will TheForvm go in?

Who the hell knows???

There has not been one debate, speech, or Q & A since the elections were announced.

How is the community supposed to vote for what it wants if the candidates won't tell us where they stand?

Kierkegaard has been suspended for 30 days by Macallan. Ken White's 30 day suspension, and subsequent reinstatement, by Marcus Aurelius was one of the main reasons that this election is occurring in the first place. Were these suspensions just? Is 30 days an appropriate punishment for a first offense? What *is* an offense, and what isn't?

There is something to be said about "love at first sight"... that something being that it doesn't exist. The proper word, as most citizens of the former British Empire will tell you, is "lust". It is lust, not love, that makes millions of fans wait with bated breath for each new release. The non-stop action, exotic cars, cool gadgets, and love-them-then-leave-them Bond girls have made this one of the most successful movie series ever. They have also conspired to lock the franchise into a death-spiral of ever-increasing film budgets and fan expectations.

This is not an unusual phenomenon. In fact, if there were a poll asking movie-goers what the average number of sequels is before a series "jumps the shark", the most common answer would be "One". There are a variety of reasons for this, but the main reason is that Hollywood financial backers, regardless of their political leanings, are very conservative when it comes to spending money to make a movie. This tends to make sequels amount to "more of the same". Which is not considered a bad thing in Hollywood circles, until the formula stops making money, which *is* a bad thing. There are two directions a series can take when it faces this predicament: death, or rebirth.