The Real Problem with America

[Hum Dinger]

Oh, hell, the real problem with America is that wealthy Europeans own our ass, control our political system, and always have.

An invasion of Switzerland is the only thing that will ever gain our freedom.

 

[uscitizen]

Yep federal representatives of states should be paid by the state they represent.

 

[jeffrockit]

EVERY American has a stake in the system. That is what our Constitution was designed to do.

Our elected officials represent everyone, even a bum living under an overpass. As such, everyone has a right and an obligation to vote

Well, no they don't. People who collect welfare have no stake. They have nothing of their own to lose. Everything is provided to them by Big Daddy. Such people have no business voting.
And their reps in Congress still represent them, of course.

how do you know the majority of them vote?

more than 50% of our country's citizens eligible to vote, DO NOT VOTE and the lower class....is who does not exercise their right to vote, the most.

so spare us... with trying to point fingers and blame them for our presidential outcomes.

get more people to vote instead of developing some means to disenfranchise our fellow citizens....sheesh

There is no "right" to vote in a federal election. That wording is not there.

Things That Are Not In the U.S. Constitution - The U.S. Constitution Online - USConstitution.net

The Constitution contains many phrases, clauses, and amendments detailing ways people cannot be denied the right to vote. You cannot deny the right to vote because of race or gender. Citizens of Washington DC can vote for President; 18-year-olds can vote; you can vote even if you fail to pay a poll tax. The Constitution also requires that anyone who can vote for the "most numerous branch" of their state legislature can vote for House members and Senate members.

Note that in all of this, though, the Constitution never explicitly ensures the right to vote, as it does the right to speech, for example. It does require that Representatives be chosen and Senators be elected by "the People," and who comprises "the People" has been expanded by the aforementioned amendments several times. Aside from these requirements, though, the qualifications for voters are left to the states. And as long as the qualifications do not conflict with anything in the Constitution, that right can be withheld. For example, in Texas, persons declared mentally incompetent and felons currently in prison or on probation are denied the right to vote. It is interesting to note that though the 26th Amendment requires that 18-year-olds must be able to vote, states can allow persons younger than 18 to vote, if they chose to.

 

[txlonghorn]

Agree with you. Term limits, to me, are the logical place to start. Eh, maybe two 4 year term limits for congressman. Then, after that, go after campaign finance.

I say get rid of the primaries and put congress on a 2 year term. If they can afford to run every 2 years and then good luck and the guy with the most votes wins. Too much can happen in 4 years. If they can't get something done in 24 months, then they are in the wrong profession. They will do ALOT more of what their constituents want too because they know that election time is always never far off.

 

[ConHog]

Well, no they don't. People who collect welfare have no stake. They have nothing of their own to lose. Everything is provided to them by Big Daddy. Such people have no business voting.
And their reps in Congress still represent them, of course.

how do you know the majority of them vote?

more than 50% of our country's citizens eligible to vote, DO NOT VOTE and the lower class....is who does not exercise their right to vote, the most.

so spare us... with trying to point fingers and blame them for our presidential outcomes.

get more people to vote instead of developing some means to disenfranchise our fellow citizens....sheesh

There is no "right" to vote in a federal election. That wording is not there.

Things That Are Not In the U.S. Constitution - The U.S. Constitution Online - USConstitution.net

The Constitution contains many phrases, clauses, and amendments detailing ways people cannot be denied the right to vote. You cannot deny the right to vote because of race or gender. Citizens of Washington DC can vote for President; 18-year-olds can vote; you can vote even if you fail to pay a poll tax. The Constitution also requires that anyone who can vote for the "most numerous branch" of their state legislature can vote for House members and Senate members.

Note that in all of this, though, the Constitution never explicitly ensures the right to vote, as it does the right to speech, for example. It does require that Representatives be chosen and Senators be elected by "the People," and who comprises "the People" has been expanded by the aforementioned amendments several times. Aside from these requirements, though, the qualifications for voters are left to the states. And as long as the qualifications do not conflict with anything in the Constitution, that right can be withheld. For example, in Texas, persons declared mentally incompetent and felons currently in prison or on probation are denied the right to vote. It is interesting to note that though the 26th Amendment requires that 18-year-olds must be able to vote, states can allow persons younger than 18 to vote, if they chose to.

You have a VERY poor understanding of the COTUS if you don't think it guarantees us a right to vote.

 

[antagon]

rabbi has really shown his ass on this topic. for someone who is not a born and bred american, it is no wonder why he lacks a fundamental grip on the proceeds of liberty from which this country has benefited.

 

[Mr. Shaman]

Agree with you. Term limits, to me, are the logical place to start. Eh, maybe two 4 year term limits for congressman. Then, after that, go after campaign finance.

I say get rid of the primaries and put congress on a 2 year term. If they can afford to run every 2 years and then good luck and the guy with the most votes wins.

....And, the most money....obviously.


​

 

[Douger]

You know we spend an awful lot of time arguing back and forth for our chosen Parties, But we are kidding ourselves America. Neither party is the answer to our problems because they are at the core of the problems.

The System is broken. Broken by a constant cycle of Campaigning and Career politicians. Broken because of a 2 party strangle hold on power.

I do not claim to have all the answers but I think 2 very important things that need to happen before America will be heading the right way are:

1 Campaign Finance.
We need to Limit the influence of Money in elections as much as we can. We could start by setting up a way to publicly fiance all campaigns equally. Compel or pay for Network coverage of debates. We should also shorten the campaign time significantly. 2 Years of it means that basically they are never not campaigning.

2 Term Limits.
We must end the career politician. Mainly because people are compelled to act differently when they have to think about re-election then when not. Maybe slightly longer terms but only 1 Term. For Both the President and Congress. No more running for re-election. We also need a more direct tool for removal of People who are not performing up to par, or not living up to their promises. Some kind of Popular Vote of No confidence where if a certain % of Americans. prolly like 3/4's vote no confidence it means we then hold A special Election to replace that person. Be it the President or A Congress person. Maybe let that person then run against the others to try and keep his or her job if he can get the votes.

Like I said I don't claim to have the answers I just know beyond a shadow of a doubt that Neither the Democrats or Republicans Nor anyone working inside our current system has them either, and to continue down our current path is definite National suicide.

You are 100% right.
Now. How do we solve the I.Q. problem of the average, drooling, drunken, flag waving, bible thumping,brainwashed assholes referred to as Murkins ?
They've voted against their own best interests for nearly 100 years.
They got exactly what they asked for.

The answer ? Vote with your feet like your ancestors did when the assholes they were living with acted Xackly like todays Murkins.

 

[antagon]

Well, no they don't. People who collect welfare have no stake. They have nothing of their own to lose. Everything is provided to them by Big Daddy. Such people have no business voting.
And their reps in Congress still represent them, of course.

how do you know the majority of them vote?

more than 50% of our country's citizens eligible to vote, DO NOT VOTE and the lower class....is who does not exercise their right to vote, the most.

so spare us... with trying to point fingers and blame them for our presidential outcomes.

get more people to vote instead of developing some means to disenfranchise our fellow citizens....sheesh

There is no "right" to vote in a federal election. That wording is not there.

Things That Are Not In the U.S. Constitution - The U.S. Constitution Online - USConstitution.net

The Constitution contains many phrases, clauses, and amendments detailing ways people cannot be denied the right to vote. You cannot deny the right to vote because of race or gender. Citizens of Washington DC can vote for President; 18-year-olds can vote; you can vote even if you fail to pay a poll tax. The Constitution also requires that anyone who can vote for the "most numerous branch" of their state legislature can vote for House members and Senate members.

Note that in all of this, though, the Constitution never explicitly ensures the right to vote, as it does the right to speech, for example. It does require that Representatives be chosen and Senators be elected by "the People," and who comprises "the People" has been expanded by the aforementioned amendments several times. Aside from these requirements, though, the qualifications for voters are left to the states. And as long as the qualifications do not conflict with anything in the Constitution, that right can be withheld. For example, in Texas, persons declared mentally incompetent and felons currently in prison or on probation are denied the right to vote. It is interesting to note that though the 26th Amendment requires that 18-year-olds must be able to vote, states can allow persons younger than 18 to vote, if they chose to.

the 26th provides that 18+y/os cant be disallowed the right to vote on the basis of their age, that is, that age requirements over 18 years are unconstitutional. it doesn't maintain that 18 year olds and older must be able to vote.

the reason why there aren't across the board universal voting rights is because of government's reservation of rights to exclude people on the basis of their actions. the most obvious example is felony disenfranchisement, a state right.

 

[antagon]

You have a VERY poor understanding of the COTUS if you don't think it guarantees us a right to vote.

i think it would help this and other arguments you've made if you took the time to know what you're talking about.

 

[jeffrockit]

how do you know the majority of them vote?

more than 50% of our country's citizens eligible to vote, DO NOT VOTE and the lower class....is who does not exercise their right to vote, the most.

so spare us... with trying to point fingers and blame them for our presidential outcomes.

get more people to vote instead of developing some means to disenfranchise our fellow citizens....sheesh

There is no "right" to vote in a federal election. That wording is not there.

Things That Are Not In the U.S. Constitution - The U.S. Constitution Online - USConstitution.net

The Constitution contains many phrases, clauses, and amendments detailing ways people cannot be denied the right to vote. You cannot deny the right to vote because of race or gender. Citizens of Washington DC can vote for President; 18-year-olds can vote; you can vote even if you fail to pay a poll tax. The Constitution also requires that anyone who can vote for the "most numerous branch" of their state legislature can vote for House members and Senate members.

Note that in all of this, though, the Constitution never explicitly ensures the right to vote, as it does the right to speech, for example. It does require that Representatives be chosen and Senators be elected by "the People," and who comprises "the People" has been expanded by the aforementioned amendments several times. Aside from these requirements, though, the qualifications for voters are left to the states. And as long as the qualifications do not conflict with anything in the Constitution, that right can be withheld. For example, in Texas, persons declared mentally incompetent and felons currently in prison or on probation are denied the right to vote. It is interesting to note that though the 26th Amendment requires that 18-year-olds must be able to vote, states can allow persons younger than 18 to vote, if they chose to.

You have a VERY poor understanding of the COTUS if you don't think it guarantees us a right to vote.

The point is, that wording (right) is not in there. If you interpret it as meaning you have a right, that is your interpretation.

 

[hortysir]

Too many pages to tell if this has already been mentioned,

But I think our biggest problem is that we're not a producer of goods anymore.
I'm not speculating on whose fault it is that manufacturing has moved away, just that we need it back.
Urban sprawl is eating away any acreage we may have for farming, so we may as well hang that up as it will only get worse.

Who has the money? Who are we borrowing from? = Who has inherited our manufacturing?

 

[Father Time]

Too many pages to tell if this has already been mentioned,

But I think our biggest problem is that we're not a producer of goods anymore.
I'm not speculating on whose fault it is that manufacturing has moved away, just that we need it back.
Urban sprawl is eating away any acreage we may have for farming, so we may as well hang that up as it will only get worse.

Who has the money? Who are we borrowing from? = Who has inherited our manufacturing?

We're still doing fine for farming.

MAJOR FOOD AND AGRICULTURAL COMMODITIES AND PRODUCERS - Countries by commodity

Now if only we can get rid of those damn corn subsidies.

 

[eots]

Revolution is the only solution ...

 

[Mr. Shaman]

Too many pages to tell if this has already been mentioned.

Let's hear it, for another fan o' LAZINESS!!!!

Good job, there, hortysir!!!

​

 

[candycorn]

You know we spend an awful lot of time arguing back and forth for our chosen Parties, But we are kidding ourselves America. Neither party is the answer to our problems because they are at the core of the problems.

The System is broken. Broken by a constant cycle of Campaigning and Career politicians. Broken because of a 2 party strangle hold on power.

I do not claim to have all the answers but I think 2 very important things that need to happen before America will be heading the right way are:

1 Campaign Finance.
We need to Limit the influence of Money in elections as much as we can. We could start by setting up a way to publicly fiance all campaigns equally. Compel or pay for Network coverage of debates. We should also shorten the campaign time significantly. 2 Years of it means that basically they are never not campaigning.

2 Term Limits.
We must end the career politician. Mainly because people are compelled to act differently when they have to think about re-election then when not. Maybe slightly longer terms but only 1 Term. For Both the President and Congress. No more running for re-election. We also need a more direct tool for removal of People who are not performing up to par, or not living up to their promises. Some kind of Popular Vote of No confidence where if a certain % of Americans. prolly like 3/4's vote no confidence it means we then hold A special Election to replace that person. Be it the President or A Congress person. Maybe let that person then run against the others to try and keep his or her job if he can get the votes.

Like I said I don't claim to have the answers I just know beyond a shadow of a doubt that Neither the Democrats or Republicans Nor anyone working inside our current system has them either, and to continue down our current path is definite National suicide.

Those are fine ideas (term limits not so much)...but I have another one that will do two things--I guarantee.

First it will make you cringe with either the thought of this current crop of "professionals" doing the deed or with the self-evident notion that I'm right....

or

Secondly....I'm sure to draw a healthy amount of ridicule for this suggestion and I'm sure most (if not all of you) will be happy to oblige on that front.

But here it goes;

We need a Constitutional Convention. We need it now.
If, five generations ago, someone in your family had wrote how you should be spending your Tuesday afternoons, would you still be doing it? Maybe but I think most of us would realize that the best thinking of 1780 isn't compatible with 2010.

Maybe with Jefferson, Washington, Monroe, Franklin, et. al.----the best minds ever happened to be in Philly at the same time for the same purpose without any thought of self-interests at all; but I doubt it. The point is that these men were flawed and they likely knew they were flawed. Somehow, in the space of 230 years, we have adorned them with a saint-like status where they could have done no wrong. Bubkus.

I'm not saying re-write the entire thing; I am saying this:

*Include hard texts on privacy (none exists now)
*Make advertising in federal elections every 2 years totally free so Candidates don't have to raise millions of dollars to pay for it; (thus making them wards of big business.)
*Get rid of the War Powers Act (we're either all in or we fold) and specific laws that are encated when Congess declares war to pay for the things
*Spell out the 2nd Amendment.

 

[The Rabbi]

Too many pages to tell if this has already been mentioned,

But I think our biggest problem is that we're not a producer of goods anymore.
I'm not speculating on whose fault it is that manufacturing has moved away, just that we need it back.
Urban sprawl is eating away any acreage we may have for farming, so we may as well hang that up as it will only get worse.

Who has the money? Who are we borrowing from? = Who has inherited our manufacturing?

Actually we produce more goods than we ever have. We have fewer people involved in manufacturing, largely through increased efficiency.

 

[hortysir]

Too many pages to tell if this has already been mentioned.

Let's hear it, for another fan o' LAZINESS!!!!

Good job, there, hortysir!!!

​

Not laziness.

Just didn't want to deal with 90 posts of ↕↕↕ that kind of bullshit ↕↕↕

 

[hortysir]

Too many pages to tell if this has already been mentioned,

But I think our biggest problem is that we're not a producer of goods anymore.
I'm not speculating on whose fault it is that manufacturing has moved away, just that we need it back.
Urban sprawl is eating away any acreage we may have for farming, so we may as well hang that up as it will only get worse.

Who has the money? Who are we borrowing from? = Who has inherited our manufacturing?

Actually we produce more goods than we ever have. We have fewer people involved in manufacturing, largely through increased efficiency.

Even with plants closing down everywhere?
Really?

 

[The Rabbi]

Too many pages to tell if this has already been mentioned,

But I think our biggest problem is that we're not a producer of goods anymore.
I'm not speculating on whose fault it is that manufacturing has moved away, just that we need it back.
Urban sprawl is eating away any acreage we may have for farming, so we may as well hang that up as it will only get worse.

Who has the money? Who are we borrowing from? = Who has inherited our manufacturing?

Actually we produce more goods than we ever have. We have fewer people involved in manufacturing, largely through increased efficiency.

Even with plants closing down everywhere?
Really?

Yup. Go check the Nat'l Association of Manufacturers. Job loss has been due to increased productivity, not loss of production. Recent book about this very topic.
We have many fewer people working in agriculture than we did 100 years ago too. Does that mean we don't produce any agricultural product?