Sweveham

Sweveham, I've enjoyed having you and your contributions here. You will be missed but I hope you will find pastures greener elsewhere. And if you feel like peeking in from time to time, you will always be welcome.

Well, what is the alternative to government involvement in healthcare and education?
You see, it is simply the case that many who are poor, unemployed, sick or disabled will simply die or live horrible lives without a strong welfare state to assist them. Some conservatives believe that private charity will be a adequate replacement for social safety net, but that is a view that is lacking in historical understanding. History shows that private charity was wholly unable to care adequately for the unfortunate. It was the kind of horrors Dickens wrote about.
I have no pretensions of objectivity in this. I have myself received a public education, uses government funded healthcare, visits the library weekly and has even lived on a disability benefits for a few years. My life would probably have ended rather quickly if I lived in a libertarian country. This experience informs my political views, an important part of which is the principle that society has a responsibility to care for the unfortunate and that taxation is acceptable to fulfil that responsibility.

This is simply wrong. There is no other way to set economic, or really any political policy than by ideology. Politicians today like to claim that their policies is beyond ideology and solely informed by pragmatical concerns. Their policy is "whatever works", as Tony Blair liked to say.
The problem with this is that a political policy can only be said to work if it achieves a result you want. And what results you want of course depends on your ideology, the values and principles that you hold. Denying that you have an ideology when you are a political actor is merely obscuring the values that underlie your actions. Conservatives, liberals and socialists all have different value systems and therefore want different results. 
Politics always raises questions and they need answers. These questions range from foundational and general, like "what is a good society?" and "how shall we achieve that society", to specific matters of policy. Answering them in a coherent and (nota bene) consistent way requires a system of values, an ideology. Philosophically, you can't consider each issue separately from the rest. Political action requires reasonable justification, and that justification must rest on a rational, coherent and consistent philosophical worldview,

This is simply wrong. There is no other way to set economic, or really any political policy than by ideology. Politicians today like to claim that their policies is beyond ideology and solely informed by pragmatical concerns. Their policy is "whatever works", as Tony Blair liked to say.
The problem with this is that a political policy can only be said to work if it achieves a result you want. And what results you want of course depends on your ideology, the values and principles that you hold. Denying that you have an ideology when you are a political actor is merely obscuring the values that underlie your actions. Conservatives, liberals and socialists all have different value systems and therefore want different results. 
Politics always raises questions and they need answers. These questions range from foundational and general, like "what is a good society?" and "how shall we achieve that society", to specific matters of policy. Answering them in a coherent and (nota bene) consistent way requires a system of values, an ideology. Philosophically, you can't consider each issue separately from the rest. Political action requires reasonable justification, and that justification must rest on a rational, coherent and consistent philosophical worldview,

This is simply wrong. There is no other way to set economic, or really any political policy than by ideology. Politicians today like to claim that their policies is beyond ideology and solely informed by pragmatical concerns. Their policy is "whatever works", as Tony Blair liked to say.
The problem with this is that a political policy can only be said to work if it achieves a result you want. And what results you want of course depends on your ideology, the values and principles that you hold. Denying that you have an ideology when you are a political actor is merely obscuring the values that underlie your actions. Conservatives, liberals and socialists all have different value systems and therefore want different results. 
Politics always raises questions and they need answers. These questions range from foundational and general, like "what is a good society?" and "how shall we achieve that society", to specific matters of policy. Answering them in a coherent and (nota bene) consistent way requires a system of values, an ideology. Philosophically, you can't consider each issue separately from the rest. Political action requires reasonable justification, and that justification must rest on a rational, coherent and consistent philosophical worldview,

This is some heavy stuff, man.
I didn't realize that this would be another reason why magic changing would be such a huge deal for Tedd. But now when it is pointed out, it is so obvious.
It is even heavier when you think of the fact that Tedd's situation here is not far from the reality of genderfluid people in this world.

I like that Rhoda is too nice to even make Kitty trip and fall. There is something touching and cute about that.

Adrian is telling the truth to Pandora here, and I admire him for it. It takes guts to stand up to a powerful immortal being like this, especially when she is your mother.

Adrian is telling the truth to Pandora here, and I admire him for it. It takes guts to stand up to a powerful immortal being like this, especially when she is your mother.

After I reuploaded my profile image, it started showing up again.  @mlooney, @Pharaoh RutinTutin, @The Old Hack and @PSadlon, you may wish to do the same.

I was actually wondering what Akiko was doing on her own in the mall. Turns out she wasn't actually on her own, which does make sense.
8 Years old and only wants one cookie? I can accept magic and space whales in a story, but this is straining my suspension of disbelief.
 
I'm pretty sure It's meant to be Akiko's thoughtbubble, or rather her thought caption (warning: tv tropes link). She may look as if she is listening to someone in the third panel, but I think she is just looking back at Rhoda. Granted, this is merely my interpretation and I know only too well how faulty it can be.

Everything is up in the air again! Are Susan and Diane really sisters? Will Tedd confront Magic about his disappointment? Will PharaohRutinTutin's pyramid mortgage be foreclosed? Is mlooney's dishwasher secretly summoning Nyarlathotep? Is CritterKeeper really The Old Hack's maiden aunt?
FIND OUT IN THE NEXT YEAR OF EGS! SAME EGS-HOMEPAGE, SAME EGS-FORUMS!

This may be the most painful page of EGS that I have read in quite a while. I don't think I have seen anything even near it since the time Tedd acknowledged Mr. Verres' transphobia.
It is clear that Susan has held a mental image of her father close in which she tried to preserve at least some sort of person worthy of love. It would be easier to think of him as someone who started with good intentions but stumbled into a bad mistake. Being brought face to face with the possibility that not even this much was true... yes, anger and denial are two of the first steps. Having it all intermixed with her immensely traumatic experience with the vampire back in France would not make it any better, to put it mildly.
I am torn. Nanase unquestionably meant well. But I am starting to think that she would have done better to think this more carefully through. Even so, I am doing this from hindsight so I am not precisely in a position to criticise her. Her intentions are obviously good and based on the fact that not only is Diane in danger, she also deserves to know of her half-sister's existence... and that Susan deserves to know the truth as well.
The problem with that is that while truth indeed has the power to set you free, it can also open old wounds and do grave harm. It is for that very reason that Ellen rejected the notion of telling Tedd what they had learned about his mother. This situation is of similar complexity and may well reopen old wounds for Susan... and possibly even make them worse.

I'm also fond of DIane's response. It even made me like her more. That woman has spirit.

I'm also fond of DIane's response. It even made me like her more. That woman has spirit.

I'm also fond of DIane's response. It even made me like her more. That woman has spirit.

http://www.egscomics.com/egsnp.php?id=542
Hijinks!
Also, I actually approve of Diane upping her order because of that comment, despite the fact that she's only on a date with him so that he can buy her stuff.
And Lucy in back with that wavy hair, also taking offence to that comment while apparently ignoring the guy swooning over her.

Adobe literally means dried mud.  Flash want's an update to play that. Le Sigh.
We have seen worse.

A good comparison is perhaps another Cage's piece: As Slow As Possible. The composition is only eight notepages long, and can be performed in 20 minutes. But as the name implies, you can play it slow. Very slow, in fact. 24 hours is the longest performance by a single person so far.
And a machine can play it even slower and longer. So after Cage's death some interesting people have rigged an organ in a German church to play the piece for 639 years, starting in 2001.  Let that sink in: 639 years. Organs are durable instruments, and can last that long with maintenance. The bellows are driven with electricity. Each single chord sounds for years. You can listen to the present chord on the official site of the project( which is all in german). It's the player on the right, under the words "aktueller klang".
Again, this is a case of art where the idea and the very existence of the work is more important than experiencing the work itself. And personally I love the idea, it's delightfully insane and awe-inspiring in scope.  Also, the sheer belief in the future the project represents warms my otherwise rather pessimistic heart.
Well, I've gone really off-topic now, haven't I?

A good comparison is perhaps another Cage's piece: As Slow As Possible. The composition is only eight notepages long, and can be performed in 20 minutes. But as the name implies, you can play it slow. Very slow, in fact. 24 hours is the longest performance by a single person so far.
And a machine can play it even slower and longer. So after Cage's death some interesting people have rigged an organ in a German church to play the piece for 639 years, starting in 2001.  Let that sink in: 639 years. Organs are durable instruments, and can last that long with maintenance. The bellows are driven with electricity. Each single chord sounds for years. You can listen to the present chord on the official site of the project( which is all in german). It's the player on the right, under the words "aktueller klang".
Again, this is a case of art where the idea and the very existence of the work is more important than experiencing the work itself. And personally I love the idea, it's delightfully insane and awe-inspiring in scope.  Also, the sheer belief in the future the project represents warms my otherwise rather pessimistic heart.
Well, I've gone really off-topic now, haven't I?

Poor Tedd. It makes sense that having one's dreams crushed like this should produce some kind of trauma. Hopefully he can recover.
And Voltaire is utter evil. No doubt about it. When the goal of your plan is literally psychologically traumatizing someone, you're evil.

Poor Tedd. It makes sense that having one's dreams crushed like this should produce some kind of trauma. Hopefully he can recover.
And Voltaire is utter evil. No doubt about it. When the goal of your plan is literally psychologically traumatizing someone, you're evil.

Poor Tedd. It makes sense that having one's dreams crushed like this should produce some kind of trauma. Hopefully he can recover.
And Voltaire is utter evil. No doubt about it. When the goal of your plan is literally psychologically traumatizing someone, you're evil.

Poor Tedd. It makes sense that having one's dreams crushed like this should produce some kind of trauma. Hopefully he can recover.
And Voltaire is utter evil. No doubt about it. When the goal of your plan is literally psychologically traumatizing someone, you're evil.

Poor Tedd. It makes sense that having one's dreams crushed like this should produce some kind of trauma. Hopefully he can recover.
And Voltaire is utter evil. No doubt about it. When the goal of your plan is literally psychologically traumatizing someone, you're evil.