I'm sure if there is a poll on who is the best chess player on the planet right now,the "barangay" will surely vote for wesley so.

<technical draw> for funniest kibbutzer.

I understand the distinction you're making between "personal friends" and a "voting bloc", but in the wider sense of a voting contest- or "election" if you will- the organization of "party politics" is inevitable.

If someone really wanted to check out the Pilipino National Master's analysis (and he is a titled player) it would take around 2 seconds to activate the Google translator.

Although I had a similar reaction to you <Dom> and even posted about it at <eyal's> house, if we really believe in democracy and a free election, we have to accept what may happen.

So I think <acirce> is right. You can't say you have a democracy or a free election and then start complaining about voting blocs or political parties that may arise as a consequence.

Also, remember that many of the <BW> are voting as independents, and resent the idea that they are all "following orders."

I wonder how much fur will fly if the <BW Party> votes in a "funniest kibbutzer" who is not <technical draw>.

You see, <TD> also already has a political party devoted to his election.

His party is not to be underestimated either- Every year, one second after <TD> gets elected his party goes on the campaign trail for next year.

Etiquette prevents me from either agreeing or disagreeing with you, as we seem to be known fellow travelers.

If <BW bloc> members invoke their right to enjoy a truly free and fair election, they should also understand the concomitant concept of free speech and "political satire."

<rogge's> joke is not a "low blow" in any sense.

He makes no suggestion or even implication that the BW Bloc be "blocked" or that it's unfair- he's making fun of the rise of the new party at the Caissars.

Plus, his comment passes perhaps the only true litmus test of political satire-

It's funny.

We disagree about lots of things.

All I'm saying is that you can't pretend to have an election and then start curtailing the activities of political parties, or cancel the result if you don't happen to like the party who wins.

That's not a free election and it's not democracy.

More- if a country is going to become multicultural by policy- such as America/Canada/England/most of Europe- then you can't be complaining about the deification of "Attaturk" after the fact.

If you didn't want that to happen, the solution was to ban all Turks from immigrating to England.

That's a separate issue.

Also, if England had done that, it's not "racism" either.

Virtually every single country in the world is homogeneous and blocks virtually all immigration.

We don't consider these countries to be "racist," so if England had decided to ban non-Pommie immigration you couldn't call that "racist" either.

With the *chess analyst* slot gone, there may be an opening for a phenomenologist.

Did you know that second generation Turks in England used to cheer

"Attaboy, Attaturk"!

It's a fact!

Interesting fellow- he succeeded in bringing Turkey into the modern age.

Nowadays of course the Turks abroad might benefit from a public relations campaign: