An Observation

[Modbert]

True Modbert but at this point in the countrys history I think we should get the 2 partys we have now to function correctly...then we can entertain a 3rd party. This is only my opinion. How is another whiny bunch of politicians looking out for their own special interests going to be the sort of change we want in our political system?

While I would love to think that these 2 parties can be fixed, they cannot. What we need are politicians who aren't looking for their own special interests. Those are few and hard to come by but we need someone like that. The problem we have now is we give in and just submit ourselves as a country to the two party system.

Our founding fathers warned us about this. George Washington warned us about this in his farewell speech as POTUS. The time for change is not tomorrow or down the road, the time for change is now. Because if not now, when? Because there may not be a time down the road for change to even take place at the rate this country is going.

 

[Annie]

True Modbert but at this point in the countrys history I think we should get the 2 partys we have now to function correctly...then we can entertain a 3rd party. This is only my opinion. How is another whiny bunch of politicians looking out for their own special interests going to be the sort of change we want in our political system?

While I would love to think that these 2 parties can be fixed, they cannot. What we need are politicians who aren't looking for their own special interests. Those are few and hard to come by but we need someone like that. The problem we have now is we give in and just submit ourselves as a country to the two party system.

Our founding fathers warned us about this. George Washington warned us about this in his farewell speech as POTUS. The time for change is not tomorrow or down the road, the time for change is now. Because if not now, when? Because there may not be a time down the road for change to even take place at the rate this country is going.

The founders were adamant in their contempt for interests groups, their words for political parties. However, they realize the inevitability of such. They even anticipated special interest groups, they were not nearly as clueless as many believe.

Let's keep in mind that Thomas Jefferson was the poster boy for literal interpretation, yet when it came to the Louisiana Purchase had few qualms about ditching the legislature and declaring a real estate deal a 'treaty, so he could get it done in time for Napoleon.

 

[concept]

I earned a political science degree back when the dinosaurs roamed the earth. Nevertheless, I had my world turned upside down in the past few months, especially yesterday. Contrary to my cynicism, way more Americans turned out yesterday to protest the out of control spending on the federal level than I could have dreamed of.

The implications of yesterday are huge heading into 2010. Unless something happens which make the average Joe or Jane believe the administration, which is unlikely, there will be a turnover in Congress the likes of which have not been seen in many a year, if ever.

One can only hope.

 

[PatekPhilippe]

True Modbert but at this point in the countrys history I think we should get the 2 partys we have now to function correctly...then we can entertain a 3rd party. This is only my opinion. How is another whiny bunch of politicians looking out for their own special interests going to be the sort of change we want in our political system?

While I would love to think that these 2 parties can be fixed, they cannot. What we need are politicians who aren't looking for their own special interests. Those are few and hard to come by but we need someone like that. The problem we have now is we give in and just submit ourselves as a country to the two party system.

Our founding fathers warned us about this. George Washington warned us about this in his farewell speech as POTUS. The time for change is not tomorrow or down the road, the time for change is now. Because if not now, when? Because there may not be a time down the road for change to even take place at the rate this country is going.

The only problem I see is that people we need in politics may have questionable backgrounds and do not want to see their dirty laundry aired in public. Looks like we will be stuck with our broken system until America finally wakes up and votes all of these ass clowns out of office.

 

[Modbert]

You are saying that they want to "ban" something that did not exist until most recently in a few areas where there were massive lobbying areas. Obviously the majority did not agree with GM as a feasible or reasonable expectation.

Force what in school? The majority simply do not want to be harassed for their beliefs. The majority still believes that they have the right to determine what is acceptable for their children. Teaching them "fisting" and other sex techniques in a public school setting is not acceptable, damn that is radical and right wing.

If a judge has the ten commandments in his courtroom it is too much for Christian haters. You surely would not think that believers would not fight back against the hate that has been spewed out at them for the last fifty years and getting more rabid by the day from many of these people out there.

Homosexuality has always existed. It was kept hidden by people so they wouldn't be lynched or outcasted in a society of the same people who are keeping this banned. So sorry if they didn't want to die all those years beforehand. Gay Marriage is just another right for people who are different, it's no different than Marriage except who's getting married. Besides, the best solution would be to erase Marriage from the legal terms and just everyone be EQUAL under the law with civil unions.

What we have Republicans now is proposing systems where Gay couples would be "Separate but Equal." Now where have I heard that term before?

Separate but equal - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Once upon a time, the majority did not think women should have the right to vote, that blacks should not have the right to vote, OR that Whites and Non-Whites should not get married. Times have changed.

Now to move on to my second point, you are obviously ignoring the whole idea of Creationism trying to be forced into schools. Plus school prayer which would be wrong to force kids to do. As much as you'd want to act like the GOP is only trying to stop that, you'd be wrong. Plus, the GOP are the ones against such bills that would teach that it's wrong to call people "faggots" or to discriminate. "How dare they want our kids not want to be ignorant as us!"

On to my third point, if Christians in general and the GOP are not discriminating against those non-Christians, then perhaps you can explain this:

Some Americans Reluctant to Vote for Mormon, 72-Year-Old Presidential Candidates

The 33% of Liberals in this poll who said they wouldn't vote for Atheists are frauds. However, notice only TWENTY NINE (29%) of Conservatives would even vote for an Atheist. As a group in general, 53% of this country would not vote for an Atheist. While 43% of Americans would not vote for a Homosexual and only 36% of Republicans would.

So this issue goes FAR BEYOND just Gay Marriage when it comes to the GOP problem with Atheists and Homosexuals. Whether you care to admit it is up to you.

 

[PubliusInfinitum]

I earned a political science degree back when the dinosaurs roamed the earth. Nevertheless, I had my world turned upside down in the past few months, especially yesterday. Contrary to my cynicism, way more Americans turned out yesterday to protest the out of control spending on the federal level than I could have dreamed of.

The implications of yesterday are huge heading into 2010. Unless something happens which make the average Joe or Jane believe the administration, which is unlikely, there will be a turnover in Congress the likes of which have not been seen in many a year, if ever.

From your key-board to God's Screen, Annie...

 

[Modbert]

The only problem I see is that people we need in politics may have questionable backgrounds and do not want to see their dirty laundry aired in public. Looks like we will be stuck with our broken system until America finally wakes up and votes all of these ass clowns out of office.

Reminds me of a quote from the late George Carlin, "The reason they call it the American Dream is because you have to be asleep to believe it."

America isn't going to wake up and vote these ass clowns out of office for the same reason that you touched upon earlier. The fear of change, REAL change.

 

[Annie]

The only problem I see is that people we need in politics may have questionable backgrounds and do not want to see their dirty laundry aired in public. Looks like we will be stuck with our broken system until America finally wakes up and votes all of these ass clowns out of office.

Reminds me of a quote from the late George Carlin, "The reason they call it the American Dream is because you have to be asleep to believe it."

America isn't going to wake up and vote these ass clowns out of office for the same reason that you touched upon earlier. The fear of change, REAL change.

me thinks you underestimate the survival mechanisms of our legislators and our electorate.

 

[Modbert]

me thinks you underestimate the survival mechanisms of our legislators and our electorate.

I use to overestimate it. Even IF all the old blood was voted out and replaced, eventually the new blood will become the old blood. Remember the song "We won't get fooled again"?

Meet the new boss, same as the old boss. Circle of life and all that. History may not repeat itself, but it sure is damn similar. I've read about all these revolutions that are done at the way of the gun. Just like some of these protesters are saying that should be done now.

What happens? If anyone has a opinion varied from those with the guns, it doesn't stay that way for long one way or another.

However, these protests are also more about Obama than people who run these rallies care to admit. You see these Republicans now embracing the tea party rally people, where not even a year ago they were seen as loonies by these people. What has changed? Obama got elected. So for now, they embrace the tea party people, and the tea party people just go along with it. The "new revolution" to most of them at this point is just mere back to the way Republicans use to run things supposedly.

The so called new revolution is a farce.

 

[PubliusInfinitum]

This country is not a democracy. It's a republic based on the 2 party system governed with democratic principles. There may be some lip service paid to a 3rd party but right now I can't see any successful efforts launched by candidates within their ranks. Besides...the 2 partys we have now can't function together as a team...could you imagine a 3rd party thrown into this mess me call government?

Trust me, 2000 showed us all quite well that this country isn't a Democracy.

Just because one fears change, doesn't mean we should not proceed with it. A 3rd party would be the beginning of change, the start of a new era.

On the idea of a 3rd Party Revolution:

As JFK once stated (though not on the same topic):

"But the greatest danger of all would be to do nothing. The path we have chosen for the present is full of hazards, as all paths are."

The Third Party is one of those ideas that came from lazy thinking... and the fear of doing what needs to be done to clean the pansies out of the GOP and the Communists out of the DNC... it sounds good, but to do it, ya have to form hardlines, make judgements and be prepared to kick the physical crap out of those who decide to hang on where they and their 'stinkin' thinkin' has been rejected.

Thus the radical will usually progress, until appeasing them becomes more costly than destroying them... and we're about to see what happens when that comes along. It should be interesting... if you're into that sort of mayhem.

 

[Modbert]

The Third Party is one of those ideas that came from lazy thinking... and the fear of doing what needs to be done to clean the pansies out of the GOP and the Communists out of the DNC...

By pansies, you don't mean those who are moderate do you? It's not lazy thinking, it's reality. How do you propose to people of one party to change their party? Vote out their elected officials with the people in other party? Do you really think the majority want to do that?

Let me ask you this. If you weren't happy with McCain/Palin, would of you had voted for Obama?

From your posts on here, I highly doubt it. Which is why the 3rd party solution is one of the best solutions.

 

[RodISHI]

So you are saying Robert that it should be illegal when/if I call you faggot? Yet it is okay to spread misinformation and hate against all Christians, etc... We still have this thing called freedom of speech. You yourself have used it in this forum in one form or another.

As far as teaching creationism in schools goes, it is not my idea. The ability to have a moment of silence or for someone to have the ability to say a prayer in open should not be banned. Then hey if that is what it takes to appease a few assholes out there such as yourself fine then. Give those parents their share of the federal dollar that is spent in schools and let them choose where they want their children taught. It would be a hell of a lot more efficient than the system currently in place. People can build co-ops to teach their children just like they used to do. The teachers unions are breaking the budget in many areas. Give people their freedom of choice back.

As far as gays go, who cares what they do. It is where they do it. Keep it personal like any sex should be or behind close doors. They are not exempt from decency laws. You are saying right to marry when it has never existed before. My mind will not be changed on that issue nor will the minds of many democrats I personally am friends with. Apparently Tom Harkin changed his stance most recently, I suppose he was paid well to do that because he is not representing the people that elected him.

 

[elvis]

The Third Party is one of those ideas that came from lazy thinking... and the fear of doing what needs to be done to clean the pansies out of the GOP and the Communists out of the DNC...

By pansies, you don't mean those who are moderate do you? It's not lazy thinking, it's reality. How do you propose to people of one party to change their party? Vote out their elected officials with the people in other party? Do you really think the majority want to do that?

Let me ask you this. If you weren't happy with McCain/Palin, would of you had voted for Obama?

From your posts on here, I highly doubt it. Which is why the 3rd party solution is one of the best solutions.

the problem is, a third party vote is a vote not cast against Obama or in your case, Palin.

 

[Modbert]

So you are saying Robert that it should be illegal when/if I call you faggot? Yet it is okay to spread misinformation and hate against all Christians, etc... We still have this thing called freedom of speech. You yourself have used it in this forum in one form or another.

As far as teaching creationism in schools goes, it is not my idea. The ability to have a moment of silence or for someone to have the ability to say a prayer in open should not be banned. Then hey if that is what it takes to appease a few assholes out there such as yourself fine then. Give those parents their share of the federal dollar that is spent in schools and let them choose where they want their children taught. It would be a hell of a lot more efficient than the system currently in place. People can build co-ops to teach their children just like they used to do. The teachers unions are breaking the budget in many areas. Give people their freedom of choice back.

As far as gays go, who cares what they do. It is where they do it. Keep it personal like any sex should be or behind close doors. They are not exempt from decency laws. You are saying right to marry when it has never existed before. My mind will not be changed on that issue nor will the minds of many democrats I personally am friends with. Apparently Tom Harkin changed his stance most recently, I suppose he was paid well to do that because he is not representing the people that elected him.

See, now you're being dishonest. I never said it should be illegal for you to call anyone a "faggot". In fact, it should be legal because it is freedom of speech. HOWEVER, it is still wrong to do so. Just like it's still legal to call someone a "******" but it's not only rude, but ignorant.

Stop trying to paint this debate as if it I am against freedom of speech when I am for exactly that, freedom of speech. Also, what would you consider "misinformation", just curious?

As to your second point: Nobody is questioning a moment of silence. What they are trying to implement now is prayer in school. As in all the little children take a moment to say a prayer. Would you want your kid to be taught in school how Christianity is wrong and how he shouldn't pray ever? Well the same goes that you shouldn't teach children Creationism as you're not teaching that the other religions stories of "creation" could be true as well.

There's also the whole point of keeping state separate from religion, but you seem to be ignoring that.

Also, you just don't want Gays to be gay out in public huh? How kind of you. You sound like the ruler of Iran when he says there are no homosexuals in Iran. Just because you may wish it doesn't exist because you cannot see it, doesn't make it true.

Nobody is saying they should be exempt from decency laws? Are you even paying attention to my posts. Because it seems that you are just merely ignoring them and making up your own talking posts.

 

[Modbert]

the problem is, a third party vote is a vote not cast against Obama or in your case, Palin.

Well if people don't vote in large numbers, then yes, people may feel that their vote is "counter-effective" or "worthless." However, if everyone together voted for a 3rd party, it wouldn't be. It's when people decide "Well I don't know if others would vote for a 3rd party candidate, so I'll just stick with the candidate whos views I agree with more and won't fuck me up the ass so much."

 

[elvis]

So you are saying Robert that it should be illegal when/if I call you faggot? Yet it is okay to spread misinformation and hate against all Christians, etc... We still have this thing called freedom of speech. You yourself have used it in this forum in one form or another.

As far as teaching creationism in schools goes, it is not my idea. The ability to have a moment of silence or for someone to have the ability to say a prayer in open should not be banned. Then hey if that is what it takes to appease a few assholes out there such as yourself fine then. Give those parents their share of the federal dollar that is spent in schools and let them choose where they want their children taught. It would be a hell of a lot more efficient than the system currently in place. People can build co-ops to teach their children just like they used to do. The teachers unions are breaking the budget in many areas. Give people their freedom of choice back.

As far as gays go, who cares what they do. It is where they do it. Keep it personal like any sex should be or behind close doors. They are not exempt from decency laws. You are saying right to marry when it has never existed before. My mind will not be changed on that issue nor will the minds of many democrats I personally am friends with. Apparently Tom Harkin changed his stance most recently, I suppose he was paid well to do that because he is not representing the people that elected him.

See, now you're being dishonest. I never said it should be illegal for you to call anyone a "faggot". In fact, it should be legal because it is freedom of speech. HOWEVER, it is still wrong to do so. Just like it's still legal to call someone a "******" but it's not only rude, but ignorant.

Stop trying to paint this debate as if it I am against freedom of speech when I am for exactly that, freedom of speech. Also, what would you consider "misinformation", just curious?

As to your second point: Nobody is questioning a moment of silence. What they are trying to implement now is prayer in school. As in all the little children take a moment to say a prayer. Would you want your kid to be taught in school how Christianity is wrong and how he shouldn't pray ever? Well the same goes that you shouldn't teach children Creationism as you're not teaching that the other religions stories of "creation" could be true as well.

There's also the whole point of keeping state separate from religion, but you seem to be ignoring that.

Also, you just don't want Gays to be gay out in public huh? How kind of you. You sound like the ruler of Iran when he says there are no homosexuals in Iran. Just because you may wish it doesn't exist because you cannot see it, doesn't make it true.

Nobody is saying they should be exempt from decency laws? Are you even paying attention to my posts. Because it seems that you are just merely ignoring them and making up your own talking posts.

it's not exactly legal to use either word. think hate crimes.

 

[Polk]

I think a lot of 3rd party will be elected in 2010, you?

Won't happen.

 

[Modbert]

it's not exactly legal to use either word. think hate crimes.

That's true, but as with all words, it's all about context.

For example: I can simply say the word fire in a conversation or whatever. However, if I yell it in a crowded movie theater, that's illegal.

For example: I can say, I hate "Black people" (sub the N word in there). That would be perfectly legal. However, if I say "I hate you "******" and I'm going to kill you. Then that would be a threat against one's life and illegal.

On the subject of Hate Crimes and their legality, that's a tough one.

 

[PubliusInfinitum]

The Third Party is one of those ideas that came from lazy thinking... and the fear of doing what needs to be done to clean the pansies out of the GOP and the Communists out of the DNC...

By pansies, you don't mean those who are moderate do you?

Well sis, there just aren't any historical examples of Non-moderate pansies...

It's not lazy thinking, it's reality. How do you propose to people of one party to change their party? Vote out their elected officials with the people in other party? Do you really think the majority want to do that?

No Bob... I think whats probably going to happen, is that there is going to be a bloody civil war... and the leadership will be elected from the survivors...

Let me ask you this. If you weren't happy with McCain/Palin, would of you had voted for Obama?

From your posts on here, I highly doubt it. Which is why the 3rd party solution is one of the best solutions.

Bob... so you're saying that what we need to fix the problem of Moderates comrpomising with Leftists... is to open other alternatives, where moderates can be elected to an even lower threshold than what we have now... Instead of >50%... what we need the guy that can win with the highest percentage of votes... says 35%.

Check me if I'm wrong here Bob, but didin't the last guy that won with a majority of three candidates... And if memory serves, I think he won by 40ish percent... wasn't he impeached?

As I recall that ended with two disasterous terms and the US being attacked 7 months following those disasters, costing a trillion dollars out of the US economy in the span of three hours and a global war against the ethereal forces of the Diverse Ethnicity protected and promoted by that idiot...

I'm just not sure that such is really something to be encouraged, Bob...

 

[elvis]

it's not exactly legal to use either word. think hate crimes.

That's true, but as with all words, it's all about context.

For example: I can simply say the word fire in a conversation or whatever. However, if I yell it in a crowded movie theater, that's illegal.

For example: I can say, I hate "Black people" (sub the N word in there). That would be perfectly legal. However, if I say "I hate you "******" and I'm going to kill you. Then that would be a threat against one's life and illegal.

it's a threat without the n-word. If i'm beating you half to death, calling you a dirty rat bastard fuck, should i not get the same sentence as i would had i called you a greaseball guinea wop daygo?