| Topic: |
Sociology > Depression |
| User: |
"Thomas Dehn" |
| Date: |
03 Jul 2003 04:04:08 PM |
| Object: |
How did the world end up with these political leaders? |
x-no-archive: yes
UK: lapdog Tony
US: Bush
Italy: Berlusconi, who is worse than the two other
B's combined. He passed an immunity law for
himself so that he can't be convicted for his crimes
Russia: Putin, who just abolished the last remaining
nationwide private (i.e., not controlled by his cronies)
TV network
France: Chirac
Germany: Schroeder
Thomas
.
|
|
| User: "Tim J." |
|
| Title: Re: How did the world end up with these political leaders? |
04 Jul 2003 01:40:49 AM |
|
|
On Thu, 3 Jul 2003 23:04:08 +0200, "Thomas Dehn"
<thomas-usenet@arcor.de> wrote:
US: Bush
Can't speak for the rest of the list, but ask yourself (or research)
this.
What was the turnout for registered voters in 2000, and how many
people eligible to vote were actually registered?
.
|
|
|
| User: "wombn" |
|
| Title: Re: How did the world end up with these political leaders? |
04 Jul 2003 05:49:18 AM |
|
|
On Fri, 04 Jul 2003 02:40:49 -0400, Tim J. <tj66821@usa.not> wrote:
On Thu, 3 Jul 2003 23:04:08 +0200, "Thomas Dehn"
<thomas-usenet@arcor.de> wrote:
US: Bush
Can't speak for the rest of the list, but ask yourself (or research)
this.
What was the turnout for registered voters in 2000, and how many
people eligible to vote were actually registered?
fyi, Thomas Dehn is a citizen of Germany.
.
|
|
|
| User: "Tim J." |
|
| Title: Re: How did the world end up with these political leaders? |
04 Jul 2003 10:23:49 AM |
|
|
On Fri, 04 Jul 2003 10:49:18 GMT, wombn <wombnhearmeroar@comcast.net>
wrote:
On Fri, 04 Jul 2003 02:40:49 -0400, Tim J. <tj66821@usa.not> wrote:
On Thu, 3 Jul 2003 23:04:08 +0200, "Thomas Dehn"
<thomas-usenet@arcor.de> wrote:
US: Bush
Can't speak for the rest of the list, but ask yourself (or research)
this.
What was the turnout for registered voters in 2000, and how many
people eligible to vote were actually registered?
fyi, Thomas Dehn is a citizen of Germany.
So?
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "Whiskers" |
|
| Title: Re: How did the world end up with these political leaders? |
04 Jul 2003 08:40:15 PM |
|
|
X-No-Archive: Yes
In alt.support.depression on Friday 04 Jul 2003 11:49 am, wombn
<wombnhearmeroar@comcast.net> wrote:
fyi, Thomas Dehn is a citizen of Germany.
And he specifically mentioned someone called " Schroeder" associated with
"Germany" in his list.
I am a subject of Her Brittanic Majesty. (Also registered to vote).
--
-- ^^^^^^^^^^ Interested in Citroens?
-- Whiskers <http://www.aacit.net>
-- ~~~~~~~~~~ <news:alt.autos.citroen>
.
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "Thomas Dehn" |
|
| Title: Re: How did the world end up with these political leaders? |
04 Jul 2003 11:22:56 AM |
|
|
x-no-archive: yes
"Tim J." <tj66821@usa.not> wrote:
On Thu, 3 Jul 2003 23:04:08 +0200, "Thomas Dehn"
<thomas-usenet@arcor.de> wrote:
US: Bush
Can't speak for the rest of the list, but ask yourself (or research)
this.
What was the turnout for registered
voters in 2000, and how many
people eligible to vote were actually registered?
That is a consequence of having the poor
choice between Gore and Bush (and similarly
poor choices at other elections), not the root cause.
One thing which is dumb in the US system is
that people must register to be allowed to vote.
Thomas
.
|
|
|
| User: "IOStorm" |
|
| Title: Re: How did the world end up with these political leaders? |
07 Jul 2003 04:05:15 AM |
|
|
On Fri, 4 Jul 2003 18:22:56 +0200, "Thomas Dehn"
<thomas-usenet@arcor.de> wrote:
"Tim J." <tj66821@usa.not> wrote:
On Thu, 3 Jul 2003 23:04:08 +0200, "Thomas Dehn"
<thomas-usenet@arcor.de> wrote:
US: Bush
Can't speak for the rest of the list, but ask yourself (or research)
this.
What was the turnout for registered
voters in 2000, and how many
people eligible to vote were actually registered?
That is a consequence of having the poor
choice between Gore and Bush (and similarly
poor choices at other elections), not the root cause.
One thing which is dumb in the US system is
that people must register to be allowed to vote.
1: You can vote for any man, woman, child, or animal you care to in
America. Simply write it in.
2: Without voter registration, how would you have any way of
preventing people from voting multiple times?
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "Tim J." |
|
| Title: Re: How did the world end up with these political leaders? |
04 Jul 2003 01:50:15 PM |
|
|
On Fri, 4 Jul 2003 18:22:56 +0200, "Thomas Dehn"
<thomas-usenet@arcor.de> wrote:
x-no-archive: yes
"Tim J." <tj66821@usa.not> wrote:
On Thu, 3 Jul 2003 23:04:08 +0200, "Thomas Dehn"
<thomas-usenet@arcor.de> wrote:
US: Bush
Can't speak for the rest of the list, but ask yourself (or research)
this.
What was the turnout for registered
voters in 2000, and how many
people eligible to vote were actually registered?
That is a consequence of having the poor
choice between Gore and Bush (and similarly
poor choices at other elections), not the root cause.
Agreed, but I think it's more of a problem with our two party system.
Although they will publicly deny it to their dying breaths,
Republicans and Democrats *need* each other in order to survive. It
splits the electorate into two major factions, and does not give
independent candidates a real chance to have their voices heard. I'd
love to see an end to single party balloting (where you punch
Republican or Democrat, and your votes are cast for all candidates of
that party) and I'd really like to see an end to listing party
affiliation on ballots and campaign ads. I know that would run into
some major Constitutional roadblocks, but at least it would help force
candidates to discuss real issues, instead of the "approval by
association" process they enjoy now. In some Congressional districts,
you can run a major party candidate against only an independent, and
even if the major party candidate never, ever discusses the issues,
(s)he still has an excellent chance of winning. I know many people
who go into the polls and just vote for the party without even knowing
who is running.
One thing which is dumb in the US system is
that people must register to be allowed to vote.
I must disagree with that one. The registration process has in many
cases been made so simple and convenient, I find it remarkable that
people don't even bother to register. I fear abolishment of the
registration process could lead to even more wide spread vote fraud.
All states need to end the practice of pulling jurors from the voter
registration rolls, thus ending the primary excuse I hear from people
not registering (not wanting to serve on jury duty).
.
|
|
|
| User: "Whiskers" |
|
| Title: Re: How did the world end up with these political leaders? |
04 Jul 2003 08:34:45 PM |
|
|
In alt.support.depression on Friday 04 Jul 2003 7:50 pm, Tim J.
<tj66821@usa.not> wrote:
snip
One thing which is dumb in the US system is
that people must register to be allowed to vote.
I must disagree with that one. The registration process has in many
cases been made so simple and convenient, I find it remarkable that
people don't even bother to register. I fear abolishment of the
registration process could lead to even more wide spread vote fraud.
All states need to end the practice of pulling jurors from the voter
registration rolls, thus ending the primary excuse I hear from people
not registering (not wanting to serve on jury duty).
In the UK it is compulsory to register; even homeless people can now get the
vote in London. Without registration, it would be impossible to prevent
massive fraud, or to adjust the 'wards' and 'constituencies' to keep them
all of roughly equal size as populations move about and change in size.
Registration is as simple and effortless as it could be; a letter is
delivered with the post, you check the details of who's living in your
household and old enough to vote, sign it, and post it back in the
reply-paid envelope. Or, you can go on-line and confirm the details that
way, quoting the serial-number on the letter.
Jury service is a duty that all citizens should accept willingly, if they
are at all able to deal with it - how else can they expect a fair trial by
their peers, if their peers are dodging their duty? In my country, people
who are ill or have some other valid reason can ask to be excused when the
call comes.
If the political parties don't come up with candidates to your liking, then
the logical thing to do is either join a party you more or less agree with
and try to influence the selection process, or stand yourself as an
independent or as a member of a party you've created.
If the current laws and regulations allow money to over-ride other
considerations, then the regulations need to be tightened up - so vote for
candidates who will speak up for that in the parliament, if elected. And
petition your government to get things improved too - although that's
tricky, if all the representatives are in their position thanks to
patronage.
People who feel that they are being governed and taxed without having a
voice, tend eventually to revolt. I seem to remember that happening
somewhere between Canada and Mexico, not all that long ago.
--
-- ^^^^^^^^^^ Interested in Citroens?
-- Whiskers <http://www.aacit.net>
-- ~~~~~~~~~~ <news:alt.autos.citroen>
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "Tim J." |
|
| Title: Re: How did the world end up with these political leaders? |
05 Jul 2003 12:58:31 PM |
|
|
On Fri, 4 Jul 2003 21:24:41 +0200, "Thomas Dehn"
<thomas-usenet@arcor.de> wrote:
Four weeks before
the election, each voter gets a postcard which informs
him at which place he can cast his vote. At the election,
the voter then has to show both this postcard,
and his id card.
Isn't this a de facto form of registration?
.
|
|
|
| User: "Thomas Dehn" |
|
| Title: Re: How did the world end up with these political leaders? |
05 Jul 2003 02:54:43 PM |
|
|
x-no-archive: yes
"Tim J." <tj66821@usa.not> wrote:
On Fri, 4 Jul 2003 21:24:41 +0200, "Thomas Dehn"
<thomas-usenet@arcor.de> wrote:
Four weeks before
the election, each voter gets a postcard which informs
him at which place he can cast his vote. At the election,
the voter then has to show both this postcard,
and his id card.
Isn't this a de facto form of registration?
It is a registration, but not a registration to vote, just as the US
social security number is a registration,
but is not a registration to vote, either.
Of course the administration has
to know that the voter exists and is
eligible to vote, and there also has to be some kind of list
of voters to ensure that nobody can vote multiple times.
Thomas
.
|
|
|
| User: "Alan Harding" |
|
| Title: Re: How did the world end up with these political leaders? |
13 Jul 2003 02:26:02 AM |
|
|
In article <be7a9q$20dod$1@ID-57266.news.dfncis.de>, Thomas Dehn
<thomas-usenet@arcor.de> writes
"Tim J." <tj66821@usa.not> wrote:
On Fri, 4 Jul 2003 21:24:41 +0200, "Thomas Dehn"
<thomas-usenet@arcor.de> wrote:
Four weeks before
the election, each voter gets a postcard which informs
him at which place he can cast his vote. At the election,
the voter then has to show both this postcard,
and his id card.
Isn't this a de facto form of registration?
It is a registration, but not a registration to vote, just as the US
social security number is a registration,
but is not a registration to vote, either.
Of course the administration has
to know that the voter exists and is
eligible to vote, and there also has to be some kind of list
of voters to ensure that nobody can vote multiple times.
Maybe the key difference here in the UK is that we don't have ID cards.
We get a card posted to us, but don't have to take it to the voting
centre - it just means you have to speak to the clerk. You say who you
are, and where you live, and get crossed off their subset of the
electoral register.
Ripe for cheating, you might think, but it is rarely reported.
--
Alan@harding.demon.co.uk = Alan Harding =
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
The opinions given above may be mine. They might also
just be what I feel like saying right now, okay?
.
|
|
|
| User: "Whiskers" |
|
| Title: Re: How did the world end up with these political leaders? |
14 Jul 2003 11:09:03 AM |
|
|
In alt.support.depression on Monday 14 Jul 2003 11:37 am, GlennT
<askme@noname.com> wrote:
snip
I'm Mr Jones-Smythe from Featherstone Place.
Right you are Guv'nor. Fill out the form and stick it in the box.
Then the real J-S turns up and all the majesty of the law rolls into action;
you don't want to get yourself under those wheels. And what's the point?
You don't get two votes at one polling station no matter who you say you
are, and travelling from one polling station to the next is a lot of bother
when you aren't likely to make a difference anyway, and rather conspicuous
too.
The real safeguard though, is that trying to impersonate someone who has
already voted, is going to get you into all sorts of messes.
Our 'secret ballot' isn't absolutely secret either - each ballot-paper has a
serial number, which the clerk writes down next to your name in the
register, so a fraudulent vote can, at least in theory, be removed from the
count - and presumably put through forensic tests, if it seems worth the
bother. (As soon as the poll is closed and all disputes settled, the
ballot papers are destroyed so there isn't a permanent record of who voted
for whom).
--
-- ^^^^^^^^^^ Interested in Citroens?
-- Whiskers <http://www.aacit.net>
-- ~~~~~~~~~~ <news:alt.autos.citroen>
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "Whiskers" |
|
| Title: Re: How did the world end up with these political leaders? |
14 Jul 2003 11:27:12 AM |
|
|
In alt.support.depression on Sunday 13 Jul 2003 8:26 am, Alan Harding
<Alan@harding.demon.co.uk> wrote:
snip
Maybe the key difference here in the UK is that we don't have ID cards.
We get a card posted to us, but don't have to take it to the voting
centre - it just means you have to speak to the clerk. You say who you
are, and where you live, and get crossed off their subset of the
electoral register.
snip
It seems very silly, to me, that anyone could accept a piece of paper, or a
micro-chip or magnetic stripe, as 'proof of who I am', but doubt my own
word. I do know who I am, and so do a lot of other people; a lifeless
artefact cannot "know" anything and certainly isn't 'my identity'. I
cannot be faked, but a document most certainly can (in fact, it's a
profitable tax-free business).
The only reason for any government to require "ID papers", is so that they
can restrict personal freedom and invade privacy - and seperate the
'Gyspies' from the 'Jews' and the 'Aryans', or the 'Tutsi' from the 'Hutu',
or the 'Serb' from the 'Croat', or the 'Coloured' from the 'Black' or
'Asian' ... get the picture?
--
-- ^^^^^^^^^^ Interested in Citroens?
-- Whiskers <http://www.aacit.net>
-- ~~~~~~~~~~ <news:alt.autos.citroen>
.
|
|
|
| User: "Alan Harding" |
|
| Title: Re: How did the world end up with these political leaders? |
14 Jul 2003 02:39:04 PM |
|
|
In article <282bu-ma.ln1@ID-107770.user.dfncis.de>, Whiskers
<catwheezel@operamail.com> writes
In alt.support.depression on Sunday 13 Jul 2003 8:26 am, Alan Harding
<Alan@harding.demon.co.uk> wrote:
snip
Maybe the key difference here in the UK is that we don't have ID cards.
We get a card posted to us, but don't have to take it to the voting
centre - it just means you have to speak to the clerk. You say who you
are, and where you live, and get crossed off their subset of the
electoral register.
snip
It seems very silly, to me, that anyone could accept a piece of paper, or a
micro-chip or magnetic stripe, as 'proof of who I am', but doubt my own
word. I do know who I am, and so do a lot of other people; a lifeless
artefact cannot "know" anything and certainly isn't 'my identity'. I
cannot be faked, but a document most certainly can (in fact, it's a
profitable tax-free business).
The only reason for any government to require "ID papers", is so that they
can restrict personal freedom and invade privacy - and seperate the
'Gyspies' from the 'Jews' and the 'Aryans', or the 'Tutsi' from the 'Hutu',
or the 'Serb' from the 'Croat', or the 'Coloured' from the 'Black' or
'Asian' ... get the picture?
I'll put you down as undecided, shall I?
I know someone who had to 'prove' who she was to get access, as an
executor to a will, to the bank account. She had no passport, credit
cards, driving licence, nothing that the bank would accept. She had to
apply for a passport to be able to do the job. Opting out of the
numbered society has its drawbacks.
--
Alan@harding.demon.co.uk = Alan Harding =
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
The opinions given above may be mine. They might also
just be what I feel like saying right now, okay?
.
|
|
|
| User: "Whiskers" |
|
| Title: Re: How did the world end up with these political leaders? |
15 Jul 2003 03:05:15 PM |
|
|
In alt.support.depression on Monday 14 Jul 2003 8:39 pm, Alan Harding
<Alan@harding.demon.co.uk> wrote:
snip
I'll put you down as undecided, shall I?
Heh!
I know someone who had to 'prove' who she was to get access, as an
executor to a will, to the bank account. She had no passport, credit
cards, driving licence, nothing that the bank would accept. She had to
apply for a passport to be able to do the job. Opting out of the
numbered society has its drawbacks.
Banks used to accept your word for who you were - and you could use any name
you liked to open an account. They were careful not to let the money go
without you proving that it was yours - and your signature did that
reasonably well. Banks today only insist on 'official documents' of some
sort because the government passed a law to force them to - so that the
government could keep tabs on people, or rather on the money.
I haven't changed bank since about 1982, and I have /never/ been asked for
anything more than a bank-card or cheque-book and a signature or password
or 'pin number' to get at my money or make a deposit.
Bank managers used to provide 'banker's references' if you needed someone to
'vouch for you', and the word of a clergyman or doctor (or anyone with a
university degree!) used to be accepted as proof that you were who you said
you were - and that is still true when you apply for a passport I think
(along with a copy of your 'birth certificate', for which no proof of
identity is asked, just pay the £6 and it's yours) so the claim that
requiring a passport as proof of identity is in any way 'better' is just so
much hot air. (British Passports were only introduced at around the time
of WWI - so that the government could /restrict/ movement 'for security';
they've been doing it ever since.)
I think showing a parking ticket receipt or a CCJ should be relied on more -
who but the true culprit will have either of those? ;)) I have found
utility bills are accepted as evidence of 'identity'.
--
-- ^^^^^^^^^^ Interested in Citroens?
-- Whiskers <http://www.aacit.net>
-- ~~~~~~~~~~ <news:alt.autos.citroen>
.
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "Whiskers" |
|
| Title: Re: How did the world end up with these political leaders? |
15 Jul 2003 03:10:41 PM |
|
|
X-No-Archive: Yes
In alt.support.depression on Tuesday 15 Jul 2003 2:09 am, Walter Sobcek
<wsobcek@hotmail.com> wrote:
x-no-archive: yes
"Whiskers" <catwheezel@operamail.com> wrote in message
news:282bu-ma.ln1@ID-107770.user.dfncis.de...
<snipped>
The only reason for any government to require "ID papers", is so that
they can restrict personal freedom and invade privacy - and seperate the
'Gyspies' from the 'Jews' and the 'Aryans', or the 'Tutsi' from the
'Hutu',or the 'Serb' from the 'Croat', or the 'Coloured' from the 'Black'
or 'Asian' ... get the picture?
Very well said, sir. The same can be said of any sort of personal
information required by the government.
I suspect that MI5 or 6 are not unaware of me :)) <wave>
--
-- ^^^^^^^^^^ Interested in Citroens?
-- Whiskers <http://www.aacit.net>
-- ~~~~~~~~~~ <news:alt.autos.citroen>
.
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "Alan Harding" |
|
| Title: Re: How did the world end up with these political leaders? |
14 Jul 2003 10:01:19 AM |
|
|
In article <3F128807.BACA72C8@noname.com>, GlennT <askme@noname.com>
writes
Alan Harding wrote:
In article <be7a9q$20dod$1@ID-57266.news.dfncis.de>, Thomas Dehn
<thomas-usenet@arcor.de> writes
"Tim J." <tj66821@usa.not> wrote:
On Fri, 4 Jul 2003 21:24:41 +0200, "Thomas Dehn"
<thomas-usenet@arcor.de> wrote:
Four weeks before
the election, each voter gets a postcard which informs
him at which place he can cast his vote. At the election,
the voter then has to show both this postcard,
and his id card.
Isn't this a de facto form of registration?
It is a registration, but not a registration to vote, just as the US
social security number is a registration,
but is not a registration to vote, either.
Of course the administration has
to know that the voter exists and is
eligible to vote, and there also has to be some kind of list
of voters to ensure that nobody can vote multiple times.
Maybe the key difference here in the UK is that we don't have ID cards.
We get a card posted to us, but don't have to take it to the voting
centre - it just means you have to speak to the clerk. You say who you
are, and where you live, and get crossed off their subset of the
electoral register.
Ripe for cheating, you might think, but it is rarely reported.
I'm Mr Jones-Smythe from Featherstone Place.
Right you are Guv'nor. Fill out the form and stick it in the box.
That's about it. We're a very trusting lot.
--
Alan@harding.demon.co.uk = Alan Harding =
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
The opinions given above may be mine. They might also
just be what I feel like saying right now, okay?
.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "IOStorm" |
|
| Title: Re: How did the world end up with these political leaders? |
07 Jul 2003 04:08:06 AM |
|
|
On Fri, 4 Jul 2003 21:24:41 +0200, "Thomas Dehn"
<thomas-usenet@arcor.de> wrote:
The only time we had "substantial"
vote fraud in West Germany after 1945, the
fraud was about less than 180 votes. Four weeks before
the election, each voter gets a postcard which informs
him at which place he can cast his vote. At the election,
the voter then has to show both this postcard,
and his id card. Both are checked by one official,
That is the extent of voter registration in most parts of America
also. Show your ID and proof of address, and you get your ballot.
The only way to make is easier is to have the ballot already filled
out - with all Democrat candidates pre-selected.
.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "Janithor" |
|
| Title: Re: How did the world end up with these political leaders? |
03 Jul 2003 07:44:13 PM |
|
|
x-no-archive: yes
Thomas Dehn wrote:
UK: lapdog Tony
US: Bush
Italy: Berlusconi, who is worse than the two other
B's combined. He passed an immunity law for
himself so that he can't be convicted for his crimes
Russia: Putin, who just abolished the last remaining
nationwide private (i.e., not controlled by his cronies)
TV network
France: Chirac
Germany: Schroeder
Thomas
What about the other countries in the world? Surely you can find much
worse than these examples. Don't know about Putin, but at least in the
other countries, when the time comes for them to step out of office, it
won't take a battalion of Marines to make them.
.
|
|
|
| User: "Whiskers" |
|
| Title: Re: How did the world end up with these political leaders? |
05 Jul 2003 07:42:38 PM |
|
|
In alt.support.depression on Saturday 05 Jul 2003 9:39 am, Janithor
<Janithor@comcast.net> wrote:
snip
Japan's LDP isn't better either. But to find a prime minister or
president which is worse than Italy's Berlusconi is quite difficult.
What about a non-G8 country? You seem to have a pretty myopic focus.
There are other countries in the world, you know.
Zimbabwe, Liberia, Iraq, Afghanistan, Saudi Arabia, ... here must be many
countries whose people would gladly have Berlusconi instead of what they
have got.
--
-- ^^^^^^^^^^ Interested in Citroens?
-- Whiskers <http://www.aacit.net>
-- ~~~~~~~~~~ <news:alt.autos.citroen>
.
|
|
|
| User: "Thomas Dehn" |
|
| Title: Re: How did the world end up with these political leaders? |
06 Jul 2003 03:09:08 AM |
|
|
x-no-archive: yes
"Whiskers" <catwheezel@operamail.com> wrote:
In alt.support.depression on Saturday 05 Jul 2003 9:39 am, Janithor
<Janithor@comcast.net> wrote:
Japan's LDP isn't better either. But to find a prime minister or
president which is worse than Italy's Berlusconi is quite difficult.
What about a non-G8 country? You seem to have a pretty myopic focus.
There are other countries in the world, you know.
Zimbabwe, Liberia, Iraq, Afghanistan, Saudi Arabia, ... here must be many
countries whose people would gladly have Berlusconi instead of what they
have got.
Why do you think that the dictators in these countries
are worse than Berlusconi would be if he had
absolute power in a 3rd world country?
Thomas
.
|
|
|
| User: "Alan Harding" |
|
| Title: Re: How did the world end up with these political leaders? |
13 Jul 2003 02:15:49 AM |
|
|
In article <be8n0g$23t35$1@ID-57266.news.dfncis.de>, Thomas Dehn
<thomas-usenet@arcor.de> writes
"Whiskers" <catwheezel@operamail.com> wrote:
In alt.support.depression on Saturday 05 Jul 2003 9:39 am, Janithor
<Janithor@comcast.net> wrote:
Japan's LDP isn't better either. But to find a prime minister or
president which is worse than Italy's Berlusconi is quite difficult.
What about a non-G8 country? You seem to have a pretty myopic focus.
There are other countries in the world, you know.
Zimbabwe, Liberia, Iraq, Afghanistan, Saudi Arabia, ... here must be many
countries whose people would gladly have Berlusconi instead of what they
have got.
Why do you think that the dictators in these countries
are worse than Berlusconi would be if he had
absolute power in a 3rd world country?
He probably owns several third world countries. If anyone finds out and
objects, he'll get the law changed to say it's a good idea to own them.
--
Alan@harding.demon.co.uk = Alan Harding =
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
The opinions given above may be mine. They might also
just be what I feel like saying right now, okay?
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "Janithor" |
|
| Title: Re: How did the world end up with these political leaders? |
06 Jul 2003 03:42:51 AM |
|
|
x-no-archive: yes
Thomas Dehn wrote:
x-no-archive: yes
"Whiskers" <catwheezel@operamail.com> wrote:
In alt.support.depression on Saturday 05 Jul 2003 9:39 am, Janithor
<Janithor@comcast.net> wrote:
Japan's LDP isn't better either. But to find a prime minister or
president which is worse than Italy's Berlusconi is quite difficult.
What about a non-G8 country? You seem to have a pretty myopic focus.
There are other countries in the world, you know.
Zimbabwe, Liberia, Iraq, Afghanistan, Saudi Arabia, ... here must be many
countries whose people would gladly have Berlusconi instead of what they
have got.
Why do you think that the dictators in these countries
are worse than Berlusconi would be if he had
absolute power in a 3rd world country?
Thomas
But he's not a dictator with absolute power in a 3rd world country. Why
are you even bringing this up? It doesn't even exist.
It's kind of insulting to the victims of all the crappy gov'ts out
there. You seem very focused on the West, as if the plight of
brown-skinned, non-Christian people doesn't count. Maybe I'm misreading
you, but that's what it seems like to me.
.
|
|
|
| User: "Thomas Dehn" |
|
| Title: Re: How did the world end up with these political leaders? |
06 Jul 2003 06:15:13 AM |
|
|
x-no-archive: yes
"Janithor" <Janithor@comcast.net> wrote:
Thomas Dehn wrote:
"Whiskers" <catwheezel@operamail.com> wrote:
In alt.support.depression on Saturday 05 Jul 2003 9:39 am, Janithor
<Janithor@comcast.net> wrote:
Japan's LDP isn't better either. But to find a prime minister or
president which is worse than Italy's Berlusconi is quite difficult.
What about a non-G8 country? You seem to have a pretty myopic focus.
There are other countries in the world, you know.
Zimbabwe, Liberia, Iraq, Afghanistan, Saudi Arabia, ...
here must be many countries whose people
would gladly have Berlusconi instead of what they have got.
Why do you think that the dictators in these countries
are worse than Berlusconi would be if he had
absolute power in a 3rd world country?
But he's not a dictator with absolute power in a 3rd world country. Why
are you even bringing this up? It doesn't even exist.
I did not bring it up. *You* did bring it up.
You seem to be thinking that committing hideous
crimes is fine as long as there exists
an even worse dictator who murdered a million.
And you also seem to be thinking that Berlusconi,
if he would have absolute power, would not built
KZs. I'm quite sure that he would (he would call them
differently, of course, and he would not target
Jews, but those who oppose him).
It's kind of insulting to the victims of all the
crappy gov'ts out there.
Is it insulting of murder victims if rapists
are charged for their crimes? Is it insulting
of rape victims if CEOs are prevented from
stealing millions? Is it insulting of the stock
holders of Enron and Worldcom if an honest
citizen prevents a pet thief from stealing a
pizza?
You seem very focused on the West, as if the plight of
brown-skinned, non-Christian people doesn't count.
You seem to be focused on doing nothing.
Whenever anybody criticizes anything, you claim
that that person should stay silent for the very
dubious reason that there exists something else
which you consider to be worse.
3rd world governments will improve as our governments
improve, because they have to get along
with our governments, whereas we do not
have to get along with their governments.
Having G8 governments which actually
care about human rights (rather than only about
being reelected) would improve
the conditions for those in the 3rd world, too.
Thomas
.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "Heather" |
|
| Title: Re: How did the world end up with these political leaders? |
03 Jul 2003 09:18:28 PM |
|
|
In article <3F04CDDB.10402@comcast.net>,
Janithor <Janithor@comcast.net> wrote:
x-no-archive: yes
Thomas Dehn wrote:
UK: lapdog Tony
US: Bush
Italy: Berlusconi, who is worse than the two other
B's combined. He passed an immunity law for
himself so that he can't be convicted for his crimes
Russia: Putin, who just abolished the last remaining
nationwide private (i.e., not controlled by his cronies)
TV network
France: Chirac
Germany: Schroeder
Thomas
What about the other countries in the world? Surely you can find much
worse than these examples. Don't know about Putin, but at least in the
other countries, when the time comes for them to step out of office, it
won't take a battalion of Marines to make them.
I'm beginning to think they're going to have to blast Chretien out of
office. He *says* he's stepping down in February. We'll see.
--
Heather
.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Related Articles |
|
|
