What's Going On Here???

[dilloduck]

Watchinng the federal government grind to a halt isn't exactly what I would call "america going down the tubes".

When the federal government grinds to a halt when we are being invaded, I call it pitiful.

 

[Avatar4321]

I can only speak for myself, but your assertion is way off base. Being an Independent allows me to formulate MY OWN OPINIONS and then vote for those who I believe will work in ways that will accomplish the things I believe in. What's wrong with that? I believe in fiscal responsibility and small government--keeping government out of our lives...Sound familiar? That USED to be the Republican way. Unfortunately, the Republicans seemed to lose their way since Reagan.

I was listening to Hannity the other day, and he brought up the thought, "What would Reagan do?" Well, Reagan certainly wouldn't be allowing our country to be invaded by Mexico. Reagan wouldn't think of turning over port operations to the Dubai government. And as I recall, government never reached its current size during the Reagan years. BUT WAIT...

What have the Democrats done to fix these same issues? Nothing. One could say that that is because they have no say as long as Republicans control both houses, but where are the freakin' ideas? I kept waiting for Kerry to come through with something...anything, but alas, they had nothing. What's even more disappointing is the fact that they don't seem to have anyone on the horizon who can step up.

My point: THIS is how one can be an Independent. I'm waiting for someone to tell me how we plan to control our borders. How do we plan to deal with the growing threat of Iran? I'm looking for someone to step up and offer ideas minus the bs politics.

Why is it the people who always claim to think for themselves and claim they are telling others too are always bad at people for not thinking like they do?

 

[Steve757]

Huh?

 

[Said1]

Huh?

Pretty good, for 4 hrs.

No, I don't have a life either. So there.

 

[rtwngAvngr]

Huh?

That's "mad" at people. Next time you'll have to figure it our for yourself, from context.

 

[Said1]

That's "mad" at people. Next time you'll have to figure it our for yourself, from context.

Another spelling cop. Kill the pig.

 

[rtwngAvngr]

Another spelling cop. Kill the pig.

Me hate intulekchals.

 

[Said1]

Me hate intulekchals.

Their, dum.

 

[Steve757]

I figured out "mad." I don't understand the context. What are you saying?

 

[rtwngAvngr]

I figured out "mad." I don't understand the context. What are you saying?

It's obvious. He's saying for someone who advocates openmindedness you're a bit bossy when someone doesn't think like you. I'm not saying he's right or wrong. I'm just the interpreter here.

 

[rtwngAvngr]

"Hi. I'm steve. I'll log back on and pretend I don't understand things. then I'll go away like a little beesnatch."

 

[kgoodwin10]

Dig a little deeper. What you are basically saying is you are willing to accept the mediocrity being offered rather than attempt to change it. Our elected officials no longer represent what we want. I think they don't even give a damn. They tell us what we want to hear to get a vote with no intention of ever honoring their promises.

I have no problem with a party system, and I don't disagree with the logic of your argument as far as agendas go.

What I disagree with are two parties that no longer represent the will of the people in favor of self-interest and special interest. As long as we just toss our votes the way that closest represents our views, we're giving in to the same old same old and not calling inefficient bureaucrats on their BS.

Hey Gunny, looks like we breathed some life into this board post.

No, I would not say I accept mediocrity from my political leaders or party. I think that mediocrity is the effect of uninspired agendas or agendas that are adopted by the opposing party. Take Social Security reform, this issue is dead. Why, because of sharply divided politics between Dems and Reps. Both parties contend that reform is needed; however, rather than resolving the contentious points the reform dies. (Did I just prove your point for you?) No, the reason is the party controlling the agenda on this issue is not in power to facilitate its change. Right or Wrong, that is why agendas and patrician politics moves the country in one way or the other. One other example, a Republicans agenda is a strong military. When the issue is war or a need for a strong military the Republicans are the ones controlling that agenda; therefore, they are the ones that are put in power (elected) to move that agenda. Yes, I will concede your point that in THEORY your idea of partisan politics should not matter (best people with best ideas should win). But best people with best ideas turn into Parisian hacks after they win their office. In reality agendas and support for those agenda are what move this country in one way or the other and not best people with best ideas. (I think you already conceded that point.)

I see the greatest merit to your argument at the local level. Typically that is where you see less influence of agendas on the candidates. Usually, these elections result in best people representing best ideas. However, if at the local level Mr Democrat wins election over Ms Republican on the best idea: Elect me because I will lobby for federal money to refurbish the business district resulting in more employers to the community. However, the state representation is Mr Republican that won election on the best idea cutting pork barrel expenditures then two agendas collide and neither agenda is accomplished. Therefore a voter splitting his/her ticket casts pointless vote because agendas are represented by candidates not candidates represented by agendas.

 

[dilloduck]

Hey Gunny, looks like we breathed some life into this board post.

No, I would not say I accept mediocrity from my political leaders or party. I think that mediocrity is the effect of uninspired agendas or agendas that are adopted by the opposing party. Take Social Security reform, this issue is dead. Why, because of sharply divided politics between Dems and Reps. Both parties contend that reform is needed; however, rather than resolving the contentious points the reform dies. (Did I just prove your point for you?) No, the reason is the party controlling the agenda on this issue is not in power to facilitate its change. Right or Wrong, that is why agendas and patrician politics moves the country in one way or the other. One other example, a Republicans agenda is a strong military. When the issue is war or a need for a strong military the Republicans are the ones controlling that agenda; therefore, they are the ones that are put in power (elected) to move that agenda. Yes, I will concede your point that in THEORY your idea of partisan politics should not matter (best people with best ideas should win). But best people with best ideas turn into Parisian hacks after they win their office. In reality agendas and support for those agenda are what move this country in one way or the other and not best people with best ideas. (I think you already conceded that point.)

I see the greatest merit to your argument at the local level. Typically that is where you see less influence of agendas on the candidates. Usually, these elections result in best people representing best ideas. However, if at the local level Mr Democrat wins election over Ms Republican on the best idea: Elect me because I will lobby for federal money to refurbish the business district resulting in more employers to the community. However, the state representation is Mr Republican that won election on the best idea cutting pork barrel expenditures then two agendas collide and neither agenda is accomplished. Therefore a voter splitting his/her ticket casts pointless vote because agendas are represented by candidates not candidates represented by agendas.

Where do agendas come from ? Do you think they just naturally occur or are they all of the sudden get put into the spotlight.

 

[rtwngAvngr]

goodwin- "Parisian hacks" - nice freudian typo!! :rotflmao:

 

[kgoodwin10]

Where do agendas come from ? Do you think they just naturally occur or are they all of the sudden get put into the spotlight.

Most agenda are conceived and supported by the base of the party. There are a number of exceptions, but in general I believe that to be true. The general public, in my opinion, look at the ownership of that agenda as the party that had the greatest impact and historical success. For example Social Security reform is dead because the ownership of that issue is not in power. The general public looks to the Dems to move that agenda because of their ownership and they are trusted with moving that agenda.

 

[rtwngAvngr]

Where do agendas come from ? Do you think they just naturally occur or are they all of the sudden get put into the spotlight.

http://www.prolognet.qc.ca/clyde/illumin.htm

The Illuminati are elite men, those on the top, who control the International Bankers to control, for evil purposes, the entire world. Their agentur are bred, educated, and trained to be placed behind the scenes at all levels of government. As experts and advisers, they mould government policy so as to further the secret plans of their masters. They lure people away from God by offering them money, the world, the flesh, and the devil.

Those who direct the Illuminati are against Christ and for Satan. They always remain in the dark, unidentified, and generally unsuspected. They use all peoples to serve their diabolical purposes. They divide to conquer, supplying arms and money to both sides, instigating people to fight and kill each other, in order to be able to achieve their objectives. they foster the terrorism of atomic warfare and deliberately cause world famine. Their primary goal is to form a one world government to have complete control of the entire world, destroying all religions and governments in the process.

 

[dilloduck]

http://www.prolognet.qc.ca/clyde/illumin.htm

Do the bankers know they are being manipulated?

 

[kgoodwin10]

goodwin- "Parisian hacks" - nice freudian typo!! :rotflmao:

It wasn't a typo. It's a fact of our politics. I'm not for "hackery,"(I don't think that's a word), but it's a fact of our agenda driven politics.

 

[dilloduck]

people with best ideas turn into Parisian hacks after they win their office

If its not a typo it sure is funny as hell then !!!

 

[Gunny]

Most agenda are conceived and supported by the base of the party. There are a number of exceptions, but in general I believe that to be true. The general public, in my opinion, look at the ownership of that agenda as the party that had the greatest impact and historical success. For example Social Security reform is dead because the ownership of that issue is not in power. The general public looks to the Dems to move that agenda because of their ownership and they are trusted with moving that agenda.

And WHO is the base of the party?