| Topic: |
Politics > Politics-USA |
| User: |
"KB" |
| Date: |
03 Sep 2006 10:54:59 PM |
| Object: |
Presidential "elections" in the USA |
Presidential "elections" in the USA
Since Gore vs. Bush, presidential "elections" in the USA have become
theatrical performances - designed to create/maintain the illusion of
democracy while the greediest billionaires of all, milk the people and
screw up the world. The Bush regime cheated their asses off in both of
their elections. In their B grade minds, "God" is always on their side.
It doesn't matter who you vote for anymore. Presently, those who
"count" the votes hold the power, NOT the people. Those in power are
very skilled at deception, and welcome all large sums of additional
revenues, even when it's soaked with the blood of thousands of women &
children, including American soldiers.
KB
"All this was inspired by the principle - which is quite true in itself
- that in the big lie there is always a certain force of credibility;
because the broad masses of a nation are always more easily corrupted
in the deeper strata of their emotional nature than consciously or
voluntarily; and thus in the primitive simplicity of their minds they
more readily fall victims to the big lie than the small lie, since they
themselves often tell small
lies in little matters but would be ashamed to resort to large-scale
falsehoods. It would never come into their heads to fabricate colossal
untruths, and they would not believe that others could have the
impudence to distort the truth so infamously. Even though the facts
which prove this to be so may be brought clearly to their minds, they
will still doubt and waver and will continue to think that there may be
some other explanation.
For the grossly impudent lie always leaves traces behind it, even after
it has been nailed down, a fact which is known to all expert liars in
this world and to all who conspire together in the art of lying. These
people know only too well how to use falsehood for the basest
purposes." - Hitler, Mein Kampf
.
|
|
| User: "Topaz" |
|
| Title: Re: Presidential "elections" in the USA |
04 Sep 2006 02:48:06 PM |
|
|
Hitler wrote in Mein Kampf that the Jews tell big lies. The
Jewish media took his words out of context and claimed that Hitler was
in favor of big lies. This was in itself a big lie and proof that
Hitler was right. Here is what Hitler wrote in Mein Kampf and in
context:
"But it remained for the Jews, with their unqualified capacity
for falsehood, and their fighting comrades, the Marxists, to impute
responsibility for the downfall precisely to the man who alone had
shown a superhuman will and energy in his effort to prevent the
catastrophe which he had foreseen and to save the nation from that
hour of complete overthrow and shame. By placing responsibility for
the loss of the world war on the shoulders of Ludendorff they took
away the weapon of moral right from the only adversary dangerous
enough to be likely to succeed in bringing the betrayers of the
Fatherland to justice. All this was inspired by the principle--which
is quite true in itself--that in the big lie there is always a certain
force of credibility; because the broad masses of a nation are always
more easily corrupted in the deeper strata of their emotional nature
than consciously or voluntarily, and thus in the primitive simplicity
of their minds they are more readily fall victims to the big lie than
the small lie, since they themselves often tell small lies in little
matters but would be ashamed to resort to large-scale falsehoods. It
would never come into their heads to fabricate colossal untruths, and
they would not believe that others could have the impudence to distort
truth so infamously. Even though the facts which prove this to be so
may be brought clearly to their minds, they still doubt and waver and
will continue to think that there may be some other explanation. For
the grossly impudent lie always leaves traces behind it, even after it
has been nailed down, a fact which is known to all expert liars in
this world and to all who conspire together in the art of lying. These
people know only too well how to use falsehood for the basest
purposes.
"From time immemorial, however, the Jews have known better than
any others how falsehood and calumny can be exploited. Is not their
very existence founded on one great lie, namely, that they are a
religious community, whereas in reality they are a race? And what a
race! One of the greatest thinkers that mankind has produced has
branded the Jews for all time with a statement which is profoundly and
exactly true. He (Schopenhauer) called the Jew 'The Great Master of
Lies'. Those who do not realize the truth of that statement, or do not
wish to believe it, will never be able to lend a hand in helping Truth
to prevail."
http://www.nationalvanguard.org http://www.natvan.com
http://www.thebirdman.org http://www.ihr.org/
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "Stan de SD" |
|
| Title: Re: Presidential "elections" in the USA |
30 Sep 2006 04:44:43 AM |
|
|
"KB" <know_buddee@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:1157342099.255664.263600@h48g2000cwc.googlegroups.com...
Presidential "elections" in the USA
Since Gore vs. Bush, presidential "elections" in the USA have become
theatrical performances - designed to create/maintain the illusion of
democracy while the greediest billionaires of all, milk the people and
screw up the world. The Bush regime cheated their asses off in both of
their elections.
You mean they conspired to make Democrat voters so stupid that they couldn't
figure out how to punch a ballot?
.
|
|
|
| User: "* US *" |
|
| Title: Re: Presidential "elections" in the USA |
01 Oct 2006 06:47:11 AM |
|
|
On Sat, 30 Sep 2006 02:44:43 -0700, "Stan de SD" <standesd_DIGA_NO_A_SPAM@covad.net>
wrote:
... so stupid that...
You can't understand why the computer security
experts say that paperless electronic systems are
not sufficient for voting, can you.
.
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "FiveTwoAlphaOne MikeOscarPapa.org" |
|
| Title: Re: Presidential "elections" in the USA |
04 Sep 2006 05:41:52 AM |
|
|
KB wrote:
Presidential "elections" in the USA
Since Gore vs. Bush, presidential "elections" in the USA have become
theatrical performances - designed to create/maintain the illusion of
democracy while the greediest billionaires of all, milk the people and
screw up the world.
The sad thing is that the Dems are the same animal as the GOP.
Almost as if it had two sides. They're all bought and paid
for by the same corporations, foreign governments,
special interest groups and their lobbyists. The US public
has lost control of their politicians who no longer act
in their interests. The only way out, is to elect
any 3rd party candidates who have not been bought and paid
for as yet. I do mean ANY.
The Bush regime cheated their asses off in both of
their elections. In their B grade minds, "God" is always on their side.
It doesn't matter who you vote for anymore. Presently, those who
"count" the votes hold the power, NOT the people. Those in power are
very skilled at deception, and welcome all large sums of additional
revenues, even when it's soaked with the blood of thousands of women &
children, including American soldiers.
KB
"All this was inspired by the principle - which is quite true in itself
- that in the big lie there is always a certain force of credibility;
because the broad masses of a nation are always more easily corrupted
in the deeper strata of their emotional nature than consciously or
voluntarily; and thus in the primitive simplicity of their minds they
more readily fall victims to the big lie than the small lie, since they
themselves often tell small
lies in little matters but would be ashamed to resort to large-scale
falsehoods. It would never come into their heads to fabricate colossal
untruths, and they would not believe that others could have the
impudence to distort the truth so infamously. Even though the facts
which prove this to be so may be brought clearly to their minds, they
will still doubt and waver and will continue to think that there may be
some other explanation.
For the grossly impudent lie always leaves traces behind it, even after
it has been nailed down, a fact which is known to all expert liars in
this world and to all who conspire together in the art of lying. These
people know only too well how to use falsehood for the basest
purposes." - Hitler, Mein Kampf
--
MikeOscarPapa
Vote out all incumbents in November '06
Reform the Media:Boycott CBS, CNN, FOX, ABC, NBC
(C-SPAN is on warning)
http://www.freepress.net/
http://www.prwatch.org/
http://www.alternet.org/
http://mediamatters.org/
.
|
|
|
| User: "mimus" |
|
| Title: Re: Presidential "elections" in the USA |
04 Sep 2006 12:04:31 PM |
|
|
On Mon, 04 Sep 2006 06:41:52 -0400, FiveTwoAlphaOne wrote:
KB wrote:
Since Gore vs. Bush, presidential "elections" in the USA have become
theatrical performances - designed to create/maintain the illusion of
democracy while the greediest billionaires of all, milk the people and
screw up the world.
The sad thing is that the Dems are the same animal as the GOP.
Almost as if it had two sides. They're all bought and paid
for by the same corporations, foreign governments,
special interest groups and their lobbyists. The US public
has lost control of their politicians who no longer act
in their interests.
Yep, the difference is between corporate plutocratic Tories and corporate
plutocratic Whigs . . . .
The Democrats or corporate plutocratic Whigs are more hypocritical and try
to put a better face on things, which is actually useful, since they
occasionally will try to legislate a few crumbs for non-campaign-donors,
and they can occasionally be shamed into tempering the irresponsibility,
rapacity and violence of the American plutocracy, by about five percent or
so.
Which might be the last five percent of redwoods or spotted owls, who
knows?
--
There's no point in gilding this age.
.
|
|
|
| User: "Defendario" |
|
| Title: Re: Presidential "elections" in the USA |
04 Sep 2006 01:01:34 PM |
|
|
mimus wrote:
On Mon, 04 Sep 2006 06:41:52 -0400, FiveTwoAlphaOne wrote:
KB wrote:
Since Gore vs. Bush, presidential "elections" in the USA have become
theatrical performances - designed to create/maintain the illusion of
democracy while the greediest billionaires of all, milk the people and
screw up the world.
The sad thing is that the Dems are the same animal as the GOP.
Almost as if it had two sides. They're all bought and paid
for by the same corporations, foreign governments,
special interest groups and their lobbyists. The US public
has lost control of their politicians who no longer act
in their interests.
Yep, the difference is between corporate plutocratic Tories and corporate
plutocratic Whigs . . . .
The Democrats or corporate plutocratic Whigs are more hypocritical and try
to put a better face on things, which is actually useful, since they
occasionally will try to legislate a few crumbs for non-campaign-donors,
and they can occasionally be shamed into tempering the irresponsibility,
rapacity and violence of the American plutocracy, by about five percent or
so.
Which is sufficient cause *not* to vote third-party, thus throwing the
result to the 'Pugs. Although I agree that the Dems are corrupt, the
vision of the party is more inclusive. Your "better face" is a decided
improvement.
Which might be the last five percent of redwoods or spotted owls, who
knows?
Again, reason enough to vote Dem. Stop NeoCon madness before it stops you.
.
|
|
|
| User: "FiveTwoAlphaOne MikeOscarPapa.org" |
|
| Title: Re: Presidential "elections" in the USA |
04 Sep 2006 01:53:03 PM |
|
|
Defendario wrote:
mimus wrote:
On Mon, 04 Sep 2006 06:41:52 -0400, FiveTwoAlphaOne wrote:
KB wrote:
Since Gore vs. Bush, presidential "elections" in the USA have become
theatrical performances - designed to create/maintain the illusion of
democracy while the greediest billionaires of all, milk the people and
screw up the world.
The sad thing is that the Dems are the same animal as the GOP.
Almost as if it had two sides. They're all bought and paid
for by the same corporations, foreign governments,
special interest groups and their lobbyists. The US public
has lost control of their politicians who no longer act
in their interests.
Yep, the difference is between corporate plutocratic Tories and corporate
plutocratic Whigs . . . .
The Democrats or corporate plutocratic Whigs are more hypocritical and
try
to put a better face on things, which is actually useful, since they
occasionally will try to legislate a few crumbs for non-campaign-donors,
and they can occasionally be shamed into tempering the irresponsibility,
rapacity and violence of the American plutocracy, by about five
percent or
so.
Which is sufficient cause *not* to vote third-party, thus throwing the
result to the 'Pugs.
Like that's somehow worse than the Dems??
You have to face up to the fraud sooner rather than later.
Otherwise you'll never improve the situation.
You may as well just roll over on your back like a cornered
fox and let these con-artists in the GOP and Dems screw you.
Although I agree that the Dems are corrupt, the
vision of the party is more inclusive. Your "better face" is a decided
improvement.
Which might be the last five percent of redwoods or spotted owls, who
knows?
Again, reason enough to vote Dem. Stop NeoCon madness before it stops you.
You probably didn't notice that the Dems in either the House or
Senate have done absolutely NOTHING to impede the Neocons.
The reason is that they are being bought and paid for by
the same groups. Hence my statement that they are the same
thing. Please don't give me the lame excuse that it's
because the Dems dont have a majority. They have done
NOTHING for the American people since Bush came to power.
They have been a waste of space and money.
--
MikeOscarPapa
Vote out all incumbents in November '06
Reform the Media:Boycott CBS, CNN, FOX, ABC, NBC
(C-SPAN is on warning)
http://www.freepress.net/
http://www.prwatch.org/
http://www.alternet.org/
http://mediamatters.org/
.
|
|
|
| User: "mimus" |
|
| Title: Re: Presidential "elections" in the USA |
04 Sep 2006 02:18:23 PM |
|
|
On Mon, 04 Sep 2006 14:53:03 -0400, FiveTwoAlphaOne wrote:
Defendario wrote:
mimus wrote:
On Mon, 04 Sep 2006 06:41:52 -0400, FiveTwoAlphaOne wrote:
KB wrote:
Since Gore vs. Bush, presidential "elections" in the USA have become
theatrical performances - designed to create/maintain the illusion of
democracy while the greediest billionaires of all, milk the people and
screw up the world.
The sad thing is that the Dems are the same animal as the GOP.
Almost as if it had two sides. They're all bought and paid
for by the same corporations, foreign governments,
special interest groups and their lobbyists. The US public
has lost control of their politicians who no longer act
in their interests.
Yep, the difference is between corporate plutocratic Tories and corporate
plutocratic Whigs . . . .
The Democrats or corporate plutocratic Whigs are more hypocritical and
try
to put a better face on things, which is actually useful, since they
occasionally will try to legislate a few crumbs for non-campaign-donors,
and they can occasionally be shamed into tempering the irresponsibility,
rapacity and violence of the American plutocracy, by about five
percent or
so.
Which is sufficient cause *not* to vote third-party, thus throwing the
result to the 'Pugs.
Like that's somehow worse than the Dems??
You have to face up to the fraud sooner rather than later.
Otherwise you'll never improve the situation.
You may as well just roll over on your back like a cornered
fox and let these con-artists in the GOP and Dems screw you.
Although I agree that the Dems are corrupt, the
vision of the party is more inclusive. Your "better face" is a decided
improvement.
Which might be the last five percent of redwoods or spotted owls, who
knows?
Again, reason enough to vote Dem. Stop NeoCon madness before it stops you.
Yep, I usually hold my nose and vote Democratic, even though the local
Democrats are Republicans in every respect except for being somewhat
shakily pro-union . . . .
You probably didn't notice that the Dems in either the House or
Senate have done absolutely NOTHING to impede the Neocons.
The reason is that they are being bought and paid for by
the same groups. Hence my statement that they are the same
thing. Please don't give me the lame excuse that it's
because the Dems dont have a majority. They have done
NOTHING for the American people since Bush came to power.
They have been a waste of space and money.
They've been in a minority in both houses.
You can't call committee meetings, you can't launch investigations, you
ain't ***** in that case . . . .
Although, again, even if the Democrats took both Houses this November, I
really doubt there'd be any major boat-rocking, any more than there was
under Clinton, who was actually idiot enough to go along with the
Republican demand for reining in the budget deficit on his watch, when
they didn't give a damn about that before or since (remember, he'd've
spent money on the people, more or less, whereas the Republicans are
Hell-bent on borrowing money to further enrich the wealthiest at the
expense of everyone else and no bones about it, unless you actually buy
into things like "trickle-down economics"<snort>).
And Hillary's national health insurance plan (remember when people,
including the Democratic Party at least, were concerned about that?) was a
major corporate suck-fest from top to bottom, making it so complicated
that even the policy wonks at the White House had trouble comprehending it.
--
Conservatism = plutocracy + theocracy + hypocrisy
Liberalism = plutocracy + psychosociocracy + hypocrisy
.
|
|
|
| User: "Defendario" |
|
| Title: Re: Presidential "elections" in the USA |
04 Sep 2006 06:55:07 PM |
|
|
mimus wrote:
On Mon, 04 Sep 2006 14:53:03 -0400, FiveTwoAlphaOne wrote:
Defendario wrote:
mimus wrote:
On Mon, 04 Sep 2006 06:41:52 -0400, FiveTwoAlphaOne wrote:
KB wrote:
Since Gore vs. Bush, presidential "elections" in the USA have become
theatrical performances - designed to create/maintain the illusion of
democracy while the greediest billionaires of all, milk the people and
screw up the world.
The sad thing is that the Dems are the same animal as the GOP.
Almost as if it had two sides. They're all bought and paid
for by the same corporations, foreign governments,
special interest groups and their lobbyists. The US public
has lost control of their politicians who no longer act
in their interests.
Yep, the difference is between corporate plutocratic Tories and corporate
plutocratic Whigs . . . .
The Democrats or corporate plutocratic Whigs are more hypocritical and
try
to put a better face on things, which is actually useful, since they
occasionally will try to legislate a few crumbs for non-campaign-donors,
and they can occasionally be shamed into tempering the irresponsibility,
rapacity and violence of the American plutocracy, by about five
percent or
so.
Which is sufficient cause *not* to vote third-party, thus throwing the
result to the 'Pugs.
Like that's somehow worse than the Dems??
Yeah. 'Pugs are definately worse.
You have to face up to the fraud sooner rather than later.
I do. 'Pug fraud is more odious. Give me the Dems.
Otherwise you'll never improve the situation.
One bridge at a time. First, we must free ourselves from the threat of
Apocalyptic Rapturists working with the NeoComrade power freaks. They
pose the greatest threat to civilization since the Missile Crisis, and
the way forward is tricky. Cleaning this Administration house can't be
done soon enough. It's nearly too late.
You may as well just roll over on your back like a cornered
fox and let these con-artists in the GOP and Dems screw you.
I'll never roll over. My situation is survival oriented, and I feel
fairly confident, although I want to see the least disruption possible.
Although I agree that the Dems are corrupt, the
vision of the party is more inclusive. Your "better face" is a decided
improvement.
All agree? :-)
Which might be the last five percent of redwoods or spotted owls, who
knows?
Again, reason enough to vote Dem. Stop NeoCon madness before it stops you.
Yep, I usually hold my nose and vote Democratic, even though the local
Democrats are Republicans in every respect except for being somewhat
shakily pro-union . . . .
That is an important factor. Trade Unionism is a great leveller of
society, and a major factor in the great leap forward in American
lifestyle circa 1950s ff.
You probably didn't notice that the Dems in either the House or
Senate have done absolutely NOTHING to impede the Neocons.
The reason is that they are being bought and paid for by
the same groups. Hence my statement that they are the same
thing. Please don't give me the lame excuse that it's
because the Dems dont have a majority. They have done
NOTHING for the American people since Bush came to power.
They have been a waste of space and money.
They've been in a minority in both houses.
Right. And the mood of the American people has only recently turned
decidedly against the 'Pugs. Katrina galvanized many. Incompetence is
an unforgivable sin.
You can't call committee meetings, you can't launch investigations, you
ain't ***** in that case . . . .
That will soon change. Blessed be the Day! 0:-)
Although, again, even if the Democrats took both Houses this November, I
really doubt there'd be any major boat-rocking, any more than there was
under Clinton, who was actually idiot enough to go along with the
Republican demand for reining in the budget deficit on his watch, when
they didn't give a damn about that before or since (remember, he'd've
spent money on the people, more or less, whereas the Republicans are
Hell-bent on borrowing money to further enrich the wealthiest at the
expense of everyone else and no bones about it, unless you actually buy
into things like "trickle-down economics"<snort>).
I think you are wrong. If the politics play out the way I predict, we
will have a new Administration (albeit Republican) this time next year.
All the major players, even the Cabinet, will be gone.
Good riddence to the lot of them.
And Hillary's national health insurance plan (remember when people,
including the Democratic Party at least, were concerned about that?) was a
major corporate suck-fest from top to bottom, making it so complicated
that even the policy wonks at the White House had trouble comprehending it.
sHillary isn't my favorite Democrat. Here's to hoping she stays out of
the '06 race, unless it's VP.
.
|
|
|
| User: "FiveTwoAlphaOne MikeOscarPapa.org" |
|
| Title: Re: Presidential "elections" in the USA |
04 Sep 2006 08:39:58 PM |
|
|
Defendario wrote:
mimus wrote:
On Mon, 04 Sep 2006 14:53:03 -0400, FiveTwoAlphaOne wrote:
Defendario wrote:
mimus wrote:
On Mon, 04 Sep 2006 06:41:52 -0400, FiveTwoAlphaOne wrote:
KB wrote:
Since Gore vs. Bush, presidential "elections" in the USA have
become
theatrical performances - designed to create/maintain the
illusion of
democracy while the greediest billionaires of all, milk the
people and
screw up the world.
The sad thing is that the Dems are the same animal as the GOP.
Almost as if it had two sides. They're all bought and paid
for by the same corporations, foreign governments,
special interest groups and their lobbyists. The US public
has lost control of their politicians who no longer act
in their interests.
Yep, the difference is between corporate plutocratic Tories and
corporate
plutocratic Whigs . . . .
The Democrats or corporate plutocratic Whigs are more hypocritical
and try
to put a better face on things, which is actually useful, since they
occasionally will try to legislate a few crumbs for
non-campaign-donors,
and they can occasionally be shamed into tempering the
irresponsibility,
rapacity and violence of the American plutocracy, by about five
percent or
so.
Which is sufficient cause *not* to vote third-party, thus throwing
the result to the 'Pugs.
Like that's somehow worse than the Dems??
Yeah. 'Pugs are definately worse.
Can't see the truth huh?
You have to face up to the fraud sooner rather than later.
I do. 'Pug fraud is more odious. Give me the Dems.
Totally brainwashed.
Otherwise you'll never improve the situation.
One bridge at a time. First, we must free ourselves from the threat of
Apocalyptic Rapturists working with the NeoComrade power freaks. They
pose the greatest threat to civilization since the Missile Crisis, and
the way forward is tricky. Cleaning this Administration house can't be
done soon enough. It's nearly too late.
I'm sure the Neocons support your party, since they paid for it
too.
You may as well just roll over on your back like a cornered
fox and let these con-artists in the GOP and Dems screw you.
I'll never roll over. My situation is survival oriented, and I feel
fairly confident, although I want to see the least disruption possible.
That's what they're counting on.
Although I agree that the Dems are corrupt, the
vision of the party is more inclusive. Your "better face" is a
decided improvement.
All agree? :-)
Which might be the last five percent of redwoods or spotted owls, who
knows?
Again, reason enough to vote Dem. Stop NeoCon madness before it
stops you.
It's the same animal - you have been fooled.
Yep, I usually hold my nose and vote Democratic, even though the local
Democrats are Republicans in every respect except for being somewhat
shakily pro-union . . . .
That is an important factor. Trade Unionism is a great leveller of
society, and a major factor in the great leap forward in American
lifestyle circa 1950s ff.
You probably didn't notice that the Dems in either the House or
Senate have done absolutely NOTHING to impede the Neocons.
The reason is that they are being bought and paid for by
the same groups. Hence my statement that they are the same
thing. Please don't give me the lame excuse that it's
because the Dems dont have a majority. They have done
NOTHING for the American people since Bush came to power.
They have been a waste of space and money.
They've been in a minority in both houses.
So what? They made no stand on principal.
Right. And the mood of the American people has only recently turned
decidedly against the 'Pugs. Katrina galvanized many. Incompetence is
an unforgivable sin.
The Dems did nothing but wait for the tide of public opinion to
turn, in the time honored tradition of doing nothing to rock
the boat.
You can't call committee meetings, you can't launch investigations, you
ain't ***** in that case . . . .
There are lots of other things you can do. You could for instance
submit bills to outlaw lobbying or ban lobbyists from the hill
for 6 months. Walk out of votes. Hold sit down strikes.
Call press conferences to call for impeachment.
They won't because they're the same animal.
That will soon change. Blessed be the Day! 0:-)
You'll get the same animal with different spots.
Although, again, even if the Democrats took both Houses this November, I
really doubt there'd be any major boat-rocking, any more than there was
under Clinton, who was actually idiot enough to go along with the
Republican demand for reining in the budget deficit on his watch, when
they didn't give a damn about that before or since (remember, he'd've
spent money on the people, more or less, whereas the Republicans are
Hell-bent on borrowing money to further enrich the wealthiest at the
expense of everyone else and no bones about it, unless you actually buy
into things like "trickle-down economics"<snort>).
I think you are wrong. If the politics play out the way I predict, we
will have a new Administration (albeit Republican) this time next year.
All the major players, even the Cabinet, will be gone.
Good riddence to the lot of them.
And Hillary's national health insurance plan (remember when people,
including the Democratic Party at least, were concerned about that?)
was a
major corporate suck-fest from top to bottom, making it so complicated
that even the policy wonks at the White House had trouble
comprehending it.
sHillary isn't my favorite Democrat. Here's to hoping she stays out of
the '06 race, unless it's VP.
--
MikeOscarPapa
Vote out all incumbents in November '06
Reform the Media:Boycott CBS, CNN, FOX, ABC, NBC
(C-SPAN is on warning)
http://www.freepress.net/
http://www.prwatch.org/
http://www.alternet.org/
http://mediamatters.org/
.
|
|
|
| User: "Defendario" |
|
| Title: Re: Presidential "elections" in the USA |
04 Sep 2006 09:01:36 PM |
|
|
FiveTwoAlphaOne wrote:
<BIG SNIP>
You'll get the same animal with different spots.
What's your solution, then? Vote Green and let the NeoCon murder parade
march on? Sorry, but you'll need to convince me. Try harder.
.
|
|
|
| User: "FiveTwoAlphaOne MikeOscarPapa.org" |
|
| Title: Re: Presidential "elections" in the USA |
05 Sep 2006 06:19:31 AM |
|
|
Defendario wrote:
FiveTwoAlphaOne wrote:
<BIG SNIP>
You'll get the same animal with different spots.
What's your solution, then? Vote Green and let the NeoCon murder parade
march on? Sorry, but you'll need to convince me. Try harder.
Vote anyone, Libertarian, Green, Independent. Anyone who
hasn't been tainted by the GOP and Dem old boy and old girl club
and money. Anyone who has never been in before. And even if the
Dems and GOP got a 47% each split of the seats and the balance went
to wild-cards, that would mean that they would have to
compromise to get their legislation through. Either that,
or a large block of Dems would then vote overtly with the
Neocons as we have seen in some cases already, and the
public would have no doubt as to the fraud perpetrated
upon them.
--
MikeOscarPapa
Vote out all incumbents in November '06
Reform the Media:Boycott CBS, CNN, FOX, ABC, NBC
(C-SPAN is on warning)
http://www.freepress.net/
http://www.prwatch.org/
http://www.alternet.org/
http://mediamatters.org/
.
|
|
|
| User: "Defendario" |
|
| Title: Re: Presidential "elections" in the USA |
05 Sep 2006 01:35:45 PM |
|
|
FiveTwoAlphaOne wrote:
Defendario wrote:
FiveTwoAlphaOne wrote:
<BIG SNIP>
You'll get the same animal with different spots.
What's your solution, then? Vote Green and let the NeoCon murder
parade march on? Sorry, but you'll need to convince me. Try harder.
Vote anyone, Libertarian, Green, Independent. Anyone who
hasn't been tainted by the GOP and Dem old boy and old girl club
and money. Anyone who has never been in before. And even if the
Dems and GOP got a 47% each split of the seats and the balance went
to wild-cards, that would mean that they would have to
compromise to get their legislation through.
Hold the bus. What makes you think that the majority of the splinter
votes will be taken from *NEITHER* side? That is a faulty assumption,
imo. Most of those who are maverick enough to even entertain a third
party notion would be liberal thinkers, no?
Ross Perot stole votes from HW Bush. Ralph Nader returned the favor.
Generally though, I'm of the persuasion that Greens, and most
Libertarians would normally side with the Dems.
Either that,
or a large block of Dems would then vote overtly with the
Neocons as we have seen in some cases already, and the
public would have no doubt as to the fraud perpetrated
upon them.
That has been happening. Most of those blue dogs were replaced by
Repugs, and people called that the Revolution. It wasn't really. The
fascist politicos come from both sides of the aisle. Jerusalem Joe L
comes to mind...
.
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "mimus" |
|
| Title: Re: Presidential "elections" in the USA |
04 Sep 2006 10:03:50 PM |
|
|
On Mon, 04 Sep 2006 22:01:36 -0400, Defendario wrote:
FiveTwoAlphaOne wrote:
You'll get the same animal with different spots.
What's your solution, then? Vote Green and let the NeoCon murder parade
march on? Sorry, but you'll need to convince me. Try harder.
I wonder if the problem isn't that political parties are tolerated at all,
and if they shouldn't from the start have been treated as criminal and
subversive conspiracies against the State.
Their origin in British courtier and factional infighting, as described by
Foord in _His Majesty's Opposition_; the behavior of the Federalist Party,
our first (proto-) Fascist party (see, eg, the Sedition Act, passed less
than ten years after the First Amendment); and the history of the
importation of the frank "spoils" system from Great Britain in the early
1800s, all add weight to that viewpoint, IMHO.
--
When a system is set up to accomplish some goal, a
new entity has come into being--the system itself.
No matter what the "goal" of the system, it
immediately begins to exhibit system behavior; that
is, to act according to the general laws that govern
the operation of all systems. Now the system itself
has to be dealt with.
< _Systemantics_
.
|
|
|
| User: "Defendario" |
|
| Title: Re: Presidential "elections" in the USA |
04 Sep 2006 10:10:10 PM |
|
|
mimus wrote:
On Mon, 04 Sep 2006 22:01:36 -0400, Defendario wrote:
FiveTwoAlphaOne wrote:
You'll get the same animal with different spots.
What's your solution, then? Vote Green and let the NeoCon murder parade
march on? Sorry, but you'll need to convince me. Try harder.
I wonder if the problem isn't that political parties are tolerated at all,
and if they shouldn't from the start have been treated as criminal and
subversive conspiracies against the State.
Agreed. But that horse left the barn 200+ years ago.
Their origin in British courtier and factional infighting, as described by
Foord in _His Majesty's Opposition_; the behavior of the Federalist Party,
our first (proto-) Fascist party (see, eg, the Sedition Act, passed less
than ten years after the First Amendment); and the history of the
importation of the frank "spoils" system from Great Britain in the early
1800s, all add weight to that viewpoint, IMHO.
.
|
|
|
| User: "mimus" |
|
| Title: Re: Presidential "elections" in the USA |
04 Sep 2006 10:22:43 PM |
|
|
On Mon, 04 Sep 2006 23:10:10 -0400, Defendario wrote:
mimus wrote:
On Mon, 04 Sep 2006 22:01:36 -0400, Defendario wrote:
FiveTwoAlphaOne wrote:
You'll get the same animal with different spots.
What's your solution, then? Vote Green and let the NeoCon murder parade
march on? Sorry, but you'll need to convince me. Try harder.
I wonder if the problem isn't that political parties are tolerated at all,
and if they shouldn't from the start have been treated as criminal and
subversive conspiracies against the State.
Their origin in British courtier and factional infighting, as described by
Foord in _His Majesty's Opposition_; the behavior of the Federalist Party,
our first (proto-) Fascist party (see, eg, the Sedition Act, passed less
than ten years after the First Amendment); and the history of the
importation of the frank "spoils" system from Great Britain in the early
1800s, all add weight to that viewpoint, IMHO.
Agreed. But that horse left the barn 200+ years ago.
We can re-barn horses with Constitutional amendments, you know.
Kick the chessboard right over.
.
|
|
|
| User: "Defendario" |
|
| Title: Re: Presidential "elections" in the USA |
04 Sep 2006 10:29:29 PM |
|
|
mimus wrote:
On Mon, 04 Sep 2006 23:10:10 -0400, Defendario wrote:
mimus wrote:
On Mon, 04 Sep 2006 22:01:36 -0400, Defendario wrote:
FiveTwoAlphaOne wrote:
You'll get the same animal with different spots.
What's your solution, then? Vote Green and let the NeoCon murder parade
march on? Sorry, but you'll need to convince me. Try harder.
I wonder if the problem isn't that political parties are tolerated at all,
and if they shouldn't from the start have been treated as criminal and
subversive conspiracies against the State.
Their origin in British courtier and factional infighting, as described by
Foord in _His Majesty's Opposition_; the behavior of the Federalist Party,
our first (proto-) Fascist party (see, eg, the Sedition Act, passed less
than ten years after the First Amendment); and the history of the
importation of the frank "spoils" system from Great Britain in the early
1800s, all add weight to that viewpoint, IMHO.
Agreed. But that horse left the barn 200+ years ago.
We can re-barn horses with Constitutional amendments, you know.
Kick the chessboard right over.
That means civil war. The tree of liberty will be manured for sure if
we try to go there now. Are you up for that?
:-\
.
|
|
|
| User: "FiveTwoAlphaOne MikeOscarPapa.org" |
|
| Title: Re: Presidential "elections" in the USA |
05 Sep 2006 06:35:32 AM |
|
|
Defendario wrote:
mimus wrote:
On Mon, 04 Sep 2006 23:10:10 -0400, Defendario wrote:
mimus wrote:
On Mon, 04 Sep 2006 22:01:36 -0400, Defendario wrote:
FiveTwoAlphaOne wrote:
You'll get the same animal with different spots.
What's your solution, then? Vote Green and let the NeoCon murder
parade march on? Sorry, but you'll need to convince me. Try harder.
I wonder if the problem isn't that political parties are tolerated
at all,
and if they shouldn't from the start have been treated as criminal and
subversive conspiracies against the State.
Their origin in British courtier and factional infighting, as
described by
Foord in _His Majesty's Opposition_; the behavior of the Federalist
Party,
our first (proto-) Fascist party (see, eg, the Sedition Act, passed
less
than ten years after the First Amendment); and the history of the
importation of the frank "spoils" system from Great Britain in the
early
1800s, all add weight to that viewpoint, IMHO.
Agreed. But that horse left the barn 200+ years ago.
We can re-barn horses with Constitutional amendments, you know.
Kick the chessboard right over.
That means civil war. The tree of liberty will be manured for sure if
we try to go there now. Are you up for that?
I don't know that it does, or will mean civil war.
We have more in common with one another than anyone
else, and if it came down to it, it would identify
the radical extremists in our midst who would go
for civil war, and show them to be a minority
with a BIG megaphone.
--
MikeOscarPapa
Vote out all incumbents in November '06
Reform the Media:Boycott CBS, CNN, FOX, ABC, NBC
(C-SPAN is on warning)
http://www.freepress.net/
http://www.prwatch.org/
http://www.alternet.org/
http://mediamatters.org/
.
|
|
|
| User: "Defendario" |
|
| Title: Re: Presidential "elections" in the USA |
05 Sep 2006 01:23:18 PM |
|
|
FiveTwoAlphaOne wrote:
Defendario wrote:
mimus wrote:
On Mon, 04 Sep 2006 23:10:10 -0400, Defendario wrote:
mimus wrote:
On Mon, 04 Sep 2006 22:01:36 -0400, Defendario wrote:
FiveTwoAlphaOne wrote:
You'll get the same animal with different spots.
What's your solution, then? Vote Green and let the NeoCon murder
parade march on? Sorry, but you'll need to convince me. Try harder.
I wonder if the problem isn't that political parties are tolerated
at all,
and if they shouldn't from the start have been treated as criminal and
subversive conspiracies against the State.
Their origin in British courtier and factional infighting, as
described by
Foord in _His Majesty's Opposition_; the behavior of the Federalist
Party,
our first (proto-) Fascist party (see, eg, the Sedition Act, passed
less
than ten years after the First Amendment); and the history of the
importation of the frank "spoils" system from Great Britain in the
early
1800s, all add weight to that viewpoint, IMHO.
Agreed. But that horse left the barn 200+ years ago.
We can re-barn horses with Constitutional amendments, you know.
Kick the chessboard right over.
That means civil war. The tree of liberty will be manured for sure if
we try to go there now. Are you up for that?
I don't know that it does, or will mean civil war.
We have more in common with one another than anyone
else, and if it came down to it, it would identify
the radical extremists in our midst who would go
for civil war, and show them to be a minority
with a BIG megaphone.
That's all revolutionaries are, really. In the modern paradigm of
war-by-terror, a dedicated movement could perpetuate terror
indefinately, even after every original leader/member of the movement
were dead or imprisoned.
The terrorism could be from the right or left. Two examples from the
poles are Weather Underground and McVeigh's gang.
Personally, I don't favor civil war at all. These times are to doggone
interesting for me already. Time to put adults back in charge.
A village in Texas is missing its idiot...
.
|
|
|
| User: "FiveTwoAlphaOne MikeOscarPapa.org" |
|
| Title: Re: Presidential "elections" in the USA |
05 Sep 2006 02:07:23 PM |
|
|
Defendario wrote:
FiveTwoAlphaOne wrote:
Defendario wrote:
mimus wrote:
On Mon, 04 Sep 2006 23:10:10 -0400, Defendario wrote:
mimus wrote:
On Mon, 04 Sep 2006 22:01:36 -0400, Defendario wrote:
FiveTwoAlphaOne wrote:
You'll get the same animal with different spots.
What's your solution, then? Vote Green and let the NeoCon murder
parade march on? Sorry, but you'll need to convince me. Try
harder.
I wonder if the problem isn't that political parties are tolerated
at all,
and if they shouldn't from the start have been treated as criminal
and
subversive conspiracies against the State.
Their origin in British courtier and factional infighting, as
described by
Foord in _His Majesty's Opposition_; the behavior of the
Federalist Party,
our first (proto-) Fascist party (see, eg, the Sedition Act,
passed less
than ten years after the First Amendment); and the history of the
importation of the frank "spoils" system from Great Britain in the
early
1800s, all add weight to that viewpoint, IMHO.
Agreed. But that horse left the barn 200+ years ago.
We can re-barn horses with Constitutional amendments, you know.
Kick the chessboard right over.
That means civil war. The tree of liberty will be manured for sure
if we try to go there now. Are you up for that?
I don't know that it does, or will mean civil war.
We have more in common with one another than anyone
else, and if it came down to it, it would identify
the radical extremists in our midst who would go
for civil war, and show them to be a minority
with a BIG megaphone.
That's all revolutionaries are, really. In the modern paradigm of
war-by-terror, a dedicated movement could perpetuate terror
indefinately, even after every original leader/member of the movement
were dead or imprisoned.
The terrorism could be from the right or left. Two examples from the
poles are Weather Underground and McVeigh's gang.
Personally, I don't favor civil war at all. These times are to doggone
interesting for me already. Time to put adults back in charge.
A village in Texas is missing its idiot...
He's just a stage prop for the real puppetmasters with
the money, and takes his orders like a good soldier.
--
MikeOscarPapa
Vote out all incumbents in November '06
Reform the Media:Boycott CBS, CNN, FOX, ABC, NBC
(C-SPAN is on warning)
http://www.freepress.net/
http://www.prwatch.org/
http://www.alternet.org/
http://mediamatters.org/
.
|
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "mimus" |
|
| Title: Re: Presidential "elections" in the USA |
04 Sep 2006 10:35:30 PM |
|
|
On Mon, 04 Sep 2006 23:29:29 -0400, Defendario wrote:
mimus wrote:
On Mon, 04 Sep 2006 23:10:10 -0400, Defendario wrote:
mimus wrote:
On Mon, 04 Sep 2006 22:01:36 -0400, Defendario wrote:
FiveTwoAlphaOne wrote:
You'll get the same animal with different spots.
What's your solution, then? Vote Green and let the NeoCon murder parade
march on? Sorry, but you'll need to convince me. Try harder.
I wonder if the problem isn't that political parties are tolerated at all,
and if they shouldn't from the start have been treated as criminal and
subversive conspiracies against the State.
Their origin in British courtier and factional infighting, as described by
Foord in _His Majesty's Opposition_; the behavior of the Federalist Party,
our first (proto-) Fascist party (see, eg, the Sedition Act, passed less
than ten years after the First Amendment); and the history of the
importation of the frank "spoils" system from Great Britain in the early
1800s, all add weight to that viewpoint, IMHO.
Agreed. But that horse left the barn 200+ years ago.
We can re-barn horses with Constitutional amendments, you know.
Kick the chessboard right over.
That means civil war. The tree of liberty will be manured for sure if
we try to go there now. Are you up for that?
:-\
I disagree with the prognosis.
But let the partocrats fire the first shots.
What we've seen in the last twenty-six years has just been nothing you'd
want to will to yer kids.
--
We feel America went off the track politically
sometime in August of 1776.
< _After Things Fell Apart_
.
|
|
|
| User: "FiveTwoAlphaOne MikeOscarPapa.org" |
|
| Title: Re: Presidential "elections" in the USA |
05 Sep 2006 06:37:39 AM |
|
|
mimus wrote:
On Mon, 04 Sep 2006 23:29:29 -0400, Defendario wrote:
mimus wrote:
On Mon, 04 Sep 2006 23:10:10 -0400, Defendario wrote:
mimus wrote:
On Mon, 04 Sep 2006 22:01:36 -0400, Defendario wrote:
FiveTwoAlphaOne wrote:
You'll get the same animal with different spots.
What's your solution, then? Vote Green and let the NeoCon murder parade
march on? Sorry, but you'll need to convince me. Try harder.
I wonder if the problem isn't that political parties are tolerated at all,
and if they shouldn't from the start have been treated as criminal and
subversive conspiracies against the State.
Their origin in British courtier and factional infighting, as described by
Foord in _His Majesty's Opposition_; the behavior of the Federalist Party,
our first (proto-) Fascist party (see, eg, the Sedition Act, passed less
than ten years after the First Amendment); and the history of the
importation of the frank "spoils" system from Great Britain in the early
1800s, all add weight to that viewpoint, IMHO.
Agreed. But that horse left the barn 200+ years ago.
We can re-barn horses with Constitutional amendments, you know.
Kick the chessboard right over.
That means civil war. The tree of liberty will be manured for sure if
we try to go there now. Are you up for that?
:-\
I disagree with the prognosis.
But let the partocrats fire the first shots.
What we've seen in the last twenty-six years has just been nothing you'd
want to will to yer kids.
Remember what happened after the French Reovlution: Robespierre
and the Terror? The public, his own supporters and party
turned on him because they realised no-one was safe from
his bunch of extremists. I feel sure that would happen
here.
--
MikeOscarPapa
Vote out all incumbents in November '06
Reform the Media:Boycott CBS, CNN, FOX, ABC, NBC
(C-SPAN is on warning)
http://www.freepress.net/
http://www.prwatch.org/
http://www.alternet.org/
http://mediamatters.org/
.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "FiveTwoAlphaOne MikeOscarPapa.org" |
|
| Title: Re: Presidential "elections" in the USA |
05 Sep 2006 06:31:54 AM |
|
|
mimus wrote:
On Mon, 04 Sep 2006 22:01:36 -0400, Defendario wrote:
FiveTwoAlphaOne wrote:
You'll get the same animal with different spots.
What's your solution, then? Vote Green and let the NeoCon murder parade
march on? Sorry, but you'll need to convince me. Try harder.
I wonder if the problem isn't that political parties are tolerated at all,
and if they shouldn't from the start have been treated as criminal and
subversive conspiracies against the State.
The State is the people and it's elected representatives
in our democracy. Once the people have elected these
representatives though, they cease to be responsive to
the very people that elected them and behave as you point out,
that they have gone to court to be with the king, and the
only sign of them is the bills that filter back to the
public that have their names on them. Or, often, have
no trace of them whatever.
Face it, the public, while they are fat and happy
have little interest in politics and are for the most
part semi-literate due to a failed school system,
jobs that don't require much or any serious reading,
and get most of their news from big corporations
walking in lock step with the DC Clubs.
This leaves them ignorant, gullible and easily
persuaded that things are going well and are being
tended to in their best interest, when often the
reality is exactly the opposite.
The US needs a political revolution to shake up it's
democracy. Not that the constitution needs to change but
that the political parties, their control, and their
tame media needs to be more representative of the
public they serve.
Their origin in British courtier and factional infighting, as described by
Foord in _His Majesty's Opposition_; the behavior of the Federalist Party,
our first (proto-) Fascist party (see, eg, the Sedition Act, passed less
than ten years after the First Amendment); and the history of the
importation of the frank "spoils" system from Great Britain in the early
1800s, all add weight to that viewpoint, IMHO.
--
MikeOscarPapa
Vote out all incumbents in November '06
Reform the Media:Boycott CBS, CNN, FOX, ABC, NBC
(C-SPAN is on warning)
http://www.freepress.net/
http://www.prwatch.org/
http://www.alternet.org/
http://mediamatters.org/
.
|
|
|
| User: "Defendario" |
|
| Title: Re: Presidential "elections" in the USA |
05 Sep 2006 01:29:56 PM |
|
|
FiveTwoAlphaOne wrote:
mimus wrote:
On Mon, 04 Sep 2006 22:01:36 -0400, Defendario wrote:
FiveTwoAlphaOne wrote:
You'll get the same animal with different spots.
What's your solution, then? Vote Green and let the NeoCon murder
parade march on? Sorry, but you'll need to convince me. Try harder.
I wonder if the problem isn't that political parties are tolerated at
all,
and if they shouldn't from the start have been treated as criminal and
subversive conspiracies against the State.
The State is the people and it's elected representatives
in our democracy. Once the people have elected these
representatives though, they cease to be responsive to
the very people that elected them and behave as you point out,
that they have gone to court to be with the king, and the
only sign of them is the bills that filter back to the
public that have their names on them. Or, often, have
no trace of them whatever.
Petition and redress. Prehaps the terrorscares which have befallen us
have put too many barricades between the reps and constituents?
More debates should be public, at least in the virtual sense.
Face it, the public, while they are fat and happy
have little interest in politics and are for the most
part semi-literate due to a failed school system,
jobs that don't require much or any serious reading,
and get most of their news from big corporations
walking in lock step with the DC Clubs.
Yeah. There are lots of fat stupid Americans.
This leaves them ignorant, gullible and easily
persuaded that things are going well and are being
tended to in their best interest, when often the
reality is exactly the opposite.
Most people have no interest, or for that matter, business in politics.
Plato understood this, and we ought to take stock.
The US needs a political revolution to shake up it's
democracy. Not that the constitution needs to change but
that the political parties, their control, and their
tame media needs to be more representative of the
public they serve.
If you don't did the media, go native. Get your information from the
Net, and only use the tube for crossref. What it sounds like is just
another *tro' da bumz out!* clamor, but since the majority is
Republican, I'm entertained.
Their origin in British courtier and factional infighting, as
described by
Foord in _His Majesty's Opposition_; the behavior of the Federalist
Party,
our first (proto-) Fascist party (see, eg, the Sedition Act, passed less
than ten years after the First Amendment); and the history of the
importation of the frank "spoils" system from Great Britain in the early
1800s, all add weight to that viewpoint, IMHO.
.
|
|
|
| User: "FiveTwoAlphaOne MikeOscarPapa.org" |
|
| Title: Re: Presidential "elections" in the USA |
05 Sep 2006 02:16:03 PM |
|
|
Defendario wrote:
FiveTwoAlphaOne wrote:
mimus wrote:
On Mon, 04 Sep 2006 22:01:36 -0400, Defendario wrote:
FiveTwoAlphaOne wrote:
You'll get the same animal with different spots.
What's your solution, then? Vote Green and let the NeoCon murder
parade march on? Sorry, but you'll need to convince me. Try harder.
I wonder if the problem isn't that political parties are tolerated at
all,
and if they shouldn't from the start have been treated as criminal and
subversive conspiracies against the State.
The State is the people and it's elected representatives
in our democracy. Once the people have elected these
representatives though, they cease to be responsive to
the very people that elected them and behave as you point out,
that they have gone to court to be with the king, and the
only sign of them is the bills that filter back to the
public that have their names on them. Or, often, have
no trace of them whatever.
Petition and redress. Prehaps the terrorscares which have befallen us
have put too many barricades between the reps and constituents?
No, I think they view being elected as being 'raptured'. LOL.
They are whisked away out of public sight to be in Heaven down
in DC, to be treated like royalty, wined, dined, and given loads
of free treats for voting a particular way. All they have to
do to keep it, is not rock the boat.
More debates should be public, at least in the virtual sense.
TV stations should have to give all candidates free airtime
based on %age of electorate they represent. It's the publics
airwaves, after all.
Face it, the public, while they are fat and happy
have little interest in politics and are for the most
part semi-literate due to a failed school system,
jobs that don't require much or any serious reading,
and get most of their news from big corporations
walking in lock step with the DC Clubs.
Yeah. There are lots of fat stupid Americans.
I prefer 'ignorant' to 'stupid'. Lack of education,
experience and information is what causes it.
This leaves them ignorant, gullible and easily
persuaded that things are going well and are being
tended to in their best interest, when often the
reality is exactly the opposite.
Most people have no interest, or for that matter, business in politics.
Plato understood this, and we ought to take stock.
I love democracy and one person one vote. Voting should
be mandatory for all and subject to a fine for non-compliance.
What we need is better educated voters.
The US needs a political revolution to shake up it's
democracy. Not that the constitution needs to change but
that the political parties, their control, and their
tame media needs to be more representative of the
public they serve.
If you don't did the media, go native. Get your information from the
Net, and only use the tube for crossref. What it sounds like is just
another *tro' da bumz out!* clamor, but since the majority is
Republican, I'm entertained.
Seen this?
http://www.stopbigmedia.com/
Their origin in British courtier and factional infighting, as
described by
Foord in _His Majesty's Opposition_; the behavior of the Federalist
Party,
our first (proto-) Fascist party (see, eg, the Sedition Act, passed less
than ten years after the First Amendment); and the history of the
importation of the frank "spoils" system from Great Britain in the early
1800s, all add weight to that viewpoint, IMHO.
--
MikeOscarPapa
Vote out all incumbents in November '06
Reform the Media:Boycott CBS, CNN, FOX, ABC, NBC
(C-SPAN is on warning)
http://www.stopbigmedia.com/
http://www.freepress.net/
http://www.prwatch.org/
http://www.alternet.org/
http://mediamatters.org/
.
|
|
|
| User: "Defendario" |
|
| Title: Re: Presidential "elections" in the USA |
05 Sep 2006 03:00:32 PM |
|
|
FiveTwoAlphaOne wrote:
Defendario wrote:
FiveTwoAlphaOne wrote:
mimus wrote:
On Mon, 04 Sep 2006 22:01:36 -0400, Defendario wrote:
FiveTwoAlphaOne wrote:
You'll get the same animal with different spots.
What's your solution, then? Vote Green and let the NeoCon murder
parade march on? Sorry, but you'll need to convince me. Try harder.
I wonder if the problem isn't that political parties are tolerated
at all,
and if they shouldn't from the start have been treated as criminal and
subversive conspiracies against the State.
The State is the people and it's elected representatives
in our democracy. Once the people have elected these
representatives though, they cease to be responsive to
the very people that elected them and behave as you point out,
that they have gone to court to be with the king, and the
only sign of them is the bills that filter back to the
public that have their names on them. Or, often, have
no trace of them whatever.
Petition and redress. Prehaps the terrorscares which have befallen us
have put too many barricades between the reps and constituents?
No, I think they view being elected as being 'raptured'. LOL.
They are whisked away out of public sight to be in Heaven down
in DC, to be treated like royalty, wined, dined, and given loads
of free treats for voting a particular way. All they have to
do to keep it, is not rock the boat.
Then they need to be more accessable. Evil lurks in darkness, but the
light of day, and scrutiny, purifies.
More debates should be public, at least in the virtual sense.
TV stations should have to give all candidates free airtime
based on %age of electorate they represent. It's the publics
airwaves, after all.
Agreed.
Face it, the public, while they are fat and happy
have little interest in politics and are for the most
part semi-literate due to a failed school system,
jobs that don't require much or any serious reading,
and get most of their news from big corporations
walking in lock step with the DC Clubs.
Yeah. There are lots of fat stupid Americans.
I prefer 'ignorant' to 'stupid'. Lack of education,
experience and information is what causes it.
But some are really, really stupid. And have Idontgivafukitis.
This leaves them ignorant, gullible and easily
persuaded that things are going well and are being
tended to in their best interest, when often the
reality is exactly the opposite.
Most people have no interest, or for that matter, business in
politics. Plato understood this, and we ought to take stock.
I love democracy and one person one vote. Voting should
be mandatory for all and subject to a fine for non-compliance.
What we need is better educated voters.
But the masses are asses. Forcing them to vote will only increase the
power of demagogues. Maybe the problem is a bit too much democracy, and
not enough republic.
The US needs a political revolution to shake up it's
democracy. Not that the constitution needs to change but
that the political parties, their control, and their
tame media needs to be more representative of the
public they serve.
If you don't did the media, go native. Get your information from the
Net, and only use the tube for crossref. What it sounds like is just
another *tro' da bumz out!* clamor, but since the majority is
Republican, I'm entertained.
Seen this?
http://www.stopbigmedia.com/
No. TY for the link.
:-)
Their origin in British courtier and factional infighting, as
described by
Foord in _His Majesty's Opposition_; the behavior of the Federalist
Party,
our first (proto-) Fascist party (see, eg, the Sedition Act, passed
less
than ten years after the First Amendment); and the history of the
importation of the frank "spoils" system from Great Britain in the
early
1800s, all add weight to that viewpoint, IMHO.
.
|
|
|
| User: "FiveTwoAlphaOne MikeOscarPapa.org" |
|
| Title: Re: Presidential "elections" in the USA |
05 Sep 2006 03:19:38 PM |
|
|
Defendario wrote:
FiveTwoAlphaOne wrote:
Defendario wrote:
FiveTwoAlphaOne wrote:
mimus wrote:
On Mon, 04 Sep 2006 22:01:36 -0400, Defendario wrote:
FiveTwoAlphaOne wrote:
You'll get the same animal with different spots.
What's your solution, then? Vote Green and let the NeoCon murder
parade march on? Sorry, but you'll need to convince me. Try harder.
I wonder if the problem isn't that political parties are tolerated
at all,
and if they shouldn't from the start have been treated as criminal and
subversive conspiracies against the State.
The State is the people and it's elected representatives
in our democracy. Once the people have elected these
representatives though, they cease to be responsive to
the very people that elected them and behave as you point out,
that they have gone to court to be with the king, and the
only sign of them is the bills that filter back to the
public that have their names on them. Or, often, have
no trace of them whatever.
Petition and redress. Prehaps the terrorscares which have befallen
us have put too many barricades between the reps and constituents?
No, I think they view being elected as being 'raptured'. LOL.
They are whisked away out of public sight to be in Heaven down
in DC, to be treated like royalty, wined, dined, and given loads
of free treats for voting a particular way. All they have to
do to keep it, is not rock the boat.
Then they need to be more accessable. Evil lurks in darkness, but the
light of day, and scrutiny, purifies.
That's the last thing they want, unfettered access and scrutiny!
Can you imagine, if camera crews camped outside the fancy restaurants
and brothels in DC to catch drunk congressmen and women
staggering in or out?? My God man, the government would fall!
Imagine seeing WH staffers out and about and reporting on it
tabloid style like they do overseas!
More debates should be public, at least in the virtual sense.
TV stations should have to give all candidates free airtime
based on %age of electorate they represent. It's the publics
airwaves, after all.
Agreed.
Face it, the public, while they are fat and happy
have little interest in politics and are for the most
part semi-literate due to a failed school system,
jobs that don't require much or any serious reading,
and get most of their news from big corporations
walking in lock step with the DC Clubs.
Yeah. There are lots of fat stupid Americans.
I prefer 'ignorant' to 'stupid'. Lack of education,
experience and information is what causes it.
But some are really, really stupid. And have Idontgivafukitis.
"We of the Apathetic Society had a meeting last night
and no-one came. An excellent turnout!"
This leaves them ignorant, gullible and easily
persuaded that things are going well and are being
tended to in their best interest, when often the
reality is exactly the opposite.
Most people have no interest, or for that matter, business in
politics. Plato understood this, and we ought to take stock.
I love democracy and one person one vote. Voting should
be mandatory for all and subject to a fine for non-compliance.
What we need is better educated voters.
But the masses are asses. Forcing them to vote will only increase the
power of demagogues. Maybe the problem is a bit too much democracy, and
not enough republic.
I cannot abide the though of disenfanchised people for any
reason other than clinically proven mental incompetence
or criminal records.
The US needs a political revolution to shake up it's
democracy. Not that the constitution needs to change but
that the political parties, their control, and their
tame media needs to be more representative of the
public they serve.
If you don't did the media, go native. Get your information from the
Net, and only use the tube for crossref. What it sounds like is just
another *tro' da bumz out!* clamor, but since the majority is
Republican, I'm entertained.
Seen this?
http://www.stopbigmedia.com/
No. TY for the link.
:-)
Their origin in British courtier and factional infighting, as
described by
Foord in _His Majesty's Opposition_; the behavior of the Federalist
Party,
our first (proto-) Fascist party (see, eg, the Sedition Act, passed
less
than ten years after the First Amendment); and the history of the
importation of the frank "spoils" system from Great Britain in the
early
1800s, all add weight to that viewpoint, IMHO.
--
MikeOscarPapa
Vote out all incumbents in November '06
Reform the Media:Boycott CBS, CNN, FOX, ABC, NBC
(C-SPAN is on warning)
http://www.stopbigmedia.com/
http://www.freepress.net/
http://www.prwatch.org/
http://www.alternet.org/
http://mediamatters.org/
.
|
|
|
| User: "Defendario" |
|
| Title: Re: Presidential "elections" in the USA |
05 Sep 2006 07:44:30 PM |
|
|
FiveTwoAlphaOne wrote:
Defendario wrote:
FiveTwoAlphaOne wrote:
Defendario wrote:
FiveTwoAlphaOne wrote:
mimus wrote:
On Mon, 04 Sep 2006 22:01:36 -0400, Defendario wrote:
FiveTwoAlphaOne wrote:
You'll get the same animal with different spots.
What's your solution, then? Vote Green and let the NeoCon murder
parade march on? Sorry, but you'll need to convince me. Try
harder.
I wonder if the problem isn't that political parties are tolerated
at all,
and if they shouldn't from the start have been treated as criminal
and
subversive conspiracies against the State.
The State is the people and it's elected representatives
in our democracy. Once the people have elected these
representatives though, they cease to be responsive to
the very people that elected them and behave as you point out,
that they have gone to court to be with the king, and the
only sign of them is the bills that filter back to the
public that have their names on them. Or, often, have
no trace of them whatever.
Petition and redress. Prehaps the terrorscares which have befallen
us have put too many barricades between the reps and constituents?
No, I think they view being elected as being 'raptured'. LOL.
They are whisked away out of public sight to be in Heaven down
in DC, to be treated like royalty, wined, dined, and given loads
of free treats for voting a particular way. All they have to
do to keep it, is not rock the boat.
Then they need to be more accessable. Evil lurks in darkness, but the
light of day, and scrutiny, purifies.
That's the last thing they want, unfettered access and scrutiny!
But the Reps do work for *us* after all.
Can you imagine, if camera crews camped outside the fancy restaurants
and brothels in DC to catch drunk congressmen and women
staggering in or out?? My God man, the government would fall!
Yep. Or lose the support of the core base.
Imagine seeing WH staffers out and about and reporting on it
tabloid style like they do overseas!
What about those Bush girlz? :-)
<SNIP>
Face it, the public, while they are fat and happy
have little interest in politics and are for the most
part semi-literate due to a failed school system,
jobs that don't require much or any serious reading,
and get most of their news from big corporations
walking in lock step with the DC Clubs.
Yeah. There are lots of fat stupid Americans.
I prefer 'ignorant' to 'stupid'. Lack of education,
experience and information is what causes it.
But some are really, really stupid. And have Idontgivafukitis.
"We of the Apathetic Society had a meeting last night
and no-one came. An excellent turnout!"
Those are exactly the people who should not involve themselves in
politics. They threw away their franchise on purpose by becoming dullards.
This leaves them ignorant, gullible and easily
persuaded that things are going well and are being
tended to in their best interest, when often the
reality is exactly the opposite.
Most people have no interest, or for that matter, business in
politics. Plato understood this, and we ought to take stock.
I love democracy and one person one vote. Voting should
be mandatory for all and subject to a fine for non-compliance.
What we need is better educated voters.
But the masses are asses. Forcing them to vote will only increase the
power of demagogues. Maybe the problem is a bit too much democracy,
and not enough republic.
I cannot abide the though of disenfanchised people for any
reason other than clinically proven mental incompetence
or criminal records.
Mental incompetence could be demonstrated by a test given at the polling
place concerning an overview of facts and issues to be decided on that
plebescite. As for the offenders, if their debt is paid, why deprive
them, if they are well-informed. Ex-felons didn't stop being citizens
at the moment of conviction. Why disenfranchise them?
<SNIP>
Seen this?
http://www.stopbigmedia.com/
No. TY for the link.
:-)
<SNIP>
.
|
|
|
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
