Thread: American Politics Anyone?

Ok since I started the thread heres my nickles worth, I agree with almost all of whats been said. DC seems to be a clogged toilet, its going to take some flushing, some plunging and more flushing and so on. Yes I believe Pac money should be eliminated, Lobbyists should be hung and every campaign should be comprised of debates by all concerned parties at each whistlestop, no sponsored speeches, dinners, etc. where only one side of anything is represented. I am all for term limits, but not legislated ones, I believe in an intelligent electorate(stop laughing dammit and let me finish) that knows when to keep and when to boot a politician. To me every election is the chance for term limitation and should be an opportunity for every politician to feel the chance of unemployment at the hands of their employers(us).

I also believe in the threat of a third party to keep the usual suspects in line, Americans believe in competition in every aspect of life except politics where it is needed the most. As it exists with the 2 party system it doesnt matter who wins or loses an election even the loser is still a viable presence and is still going to share in the power, which gives us "grid lock". We need several parties who are viable, for the sake of competition, to keep every other party on their toes, and worried about their place in the heart of the constituency.

I thought the chamber of commerce admitted to taking money and putting it is the same account used for campaigning, but promised not to do anything shady....

It has been a few weeks since I read anything about it.

Originally Posted by Tuxedo7

I understand your position if true; however, in direct questioning of White House staff, they cannot produce any evidence of this ... they are only speculating. Their response ... "can you prove it's not true"? The fact that they have no source or evidence of this, but decided to throw it out there in hopes it would stick kind of p****es me off. The fact that many only heard the accusation, and have developed opinions based on that, and not the later "fact check" demonstrates the effectiveness of this deceit.

Originally Posted by hoglahoo

Is the necessity of a term limit a failure of the democratic process?

Yes. The people have been content to sit on their butts and think its a my party versus theirs scenario, most times without considering what is really going on. Far too many elections are more like Pro wrestling events, the Masked Avenger versus the Challenger. They step into the ring amidst the cheers and jeers throwing each other around until the scenario plays out. Then they head for the showers, pick up their pay envelopes and head to the bar together laughing at the rubes in the audience who think it real.

We need to be more involved as an electorate, we need to ask the questions instead of the hand picked commentators, and we need to expect real answers in plain English that can be understood. There are many other issues that need to be discussed, but I still put the majority of the blame on a lazy electorate that will not educate itself and will look to the politicians for leadership when it is the responsibility of the electorate to be the leadership.

Originally Posted by gssixgun

Half the term of the politician is to set themselves up for re-election so perhaps with term limits they will be more concerned with getting there, getting the job done, and getting the heck home...
It will also put a huge monkey wrench in the whole PAC and special interest money and influence machine...

This makes me laugh. Because whenever I think about what I dislike about any organization of people, the main two things that come to mind are "internal politics" and "bureaucracy." I wonder if anyone actually has a positive connotation for either term.

I do think restructuring the allowed number of terms could be a good thing. So could downplaying the role of special interest groups (lots of ways to do that, I don't think I could even count). Both would stop politicians from spending so much time covering their own butts and force them to do... um... their jobs - serving the public. Politics is not a career, it is a service.

I also strongly agree with Nun's post above mine - the failure lies largely with the electorate; that is the failure of the democratic process.

The first thing to consider is that anyone who runs for president ought to be immediately disqualified because they have to be nuts to want the job.

Originally Posted by JimmyHAD

The first thing to consider is that anyone who runs for president ought to be immediately disqualified because they have to be nuts to want the job.

That or an ulterior motive.

Truthfully, anybody who wants to run for a political post should be disqualified.

We, the people, have exactly the government and the leadership we deserve.

Every time we accept a simple premise without thinking through the consequences (no new taxes = the same schools and services we've got now; legalize drugs, and create a whole new disenfrachised "service industry" in the inner city without a profit center, and a whole lot of new time on their hands to figure out other ways to prey on humanity; enforce rigid term limits and risk throwing the few pearls away along with the phlegm balls (wouldn't be necessary if we paid attention to those in power to begin with -- but that would take some effort, wouldn't it?); mandate strict sentencing rules (gosh, it gets kind of expensive feeding, housing, and providing medical care for those guys, doesn't it? Thought we could just "throw away the key...")); every time we mindlessly spend entire days watching State U. v. State Tech instead of reading, meeting with neighbors, volunteering, spending time with the kids; every time we vote for someone because they've got nicer hair, are more attractive, or are taller than the other candidate (which are the most reliable predictors of victory in our local, state, and national elections); every time we waste our time listening to a guy or gal because he/she cries, carries on, talks louder than necessary, or spouts simplicities that we can understand without conscious thought; every time we believe we are supporting saints, oracles, geniuses, or saviors, and not fallible human beings; every time we demonize others because they have a different thought, opinion or belief than we do, or than our neighbors, parishoners, and grandparents have passed on to us; and, yes, every time we choose to read the entertainment section instead of the regional news section of our newspapers, we betray the past Americans who gave us a constitution, died to preserve our democracy, or suffered to advance the freedoms we now enjoy, as well as our children and grandchildren who rightfully expect the inheritance we received, and not a mess of pottage.

The price of freedom is eternal vigilance. The current culture prizes infinite, trivial diversions.

Want to know why things are so critical? Look in the mirror, first. Then, cast your eyes on those around you. Unless you're one of one thousand, you'll find the answer there.

Or, as Yeats put it much more succinctly and accurately:

The best lack all conviction,

while the worst are full of a passionate intensity....

Originally Posted by nun2sharp

That or an ulterior motive.

Truthfully, anybody who wants to run for a political post should be disqualified.

Yeah, this has been commented on by a few authors I've read. I know Arthur Clarke mentioned it in one of his books that had a actual true democracy (where anyone could be elected), but I think Frank Herbert summed it up best-

"All governments suffer a recurring problem: Power attracts pathological personalities. It is not that power corrupts but that it is magnetic to the corruptible. Such people have a tendency to become drunk on violence, a condition to which they are quickly addicted."

Or more simply, power attracts the corruptible. He used that phrasing more often. The longer one above was probably part of a fictitious review of past governments in one of his books, hence the "drunk on violence" bit.

But I personally can't think of a practical way to get people genuinely interested in the welfare of the state elected. Term limits is a start, I suppose. At least we'd have people with some idea of what the outside world is like, instead of career politicians.

Originally Posted by Slartibartfast

Democrats are blaming everything on bush. Republicans are doing everything they can to stop any new legislation introduced by democrats.

I am too tired of it to care.

The new legislation that allows corporations to anonymously give money to special interest groups and chamber of commerce taking money from foreign companies/countries kind of ****es me off though.

Sounds like normal every day politics to me.....

I believe also our system has been hijacked by big money and special interests, the whole thing is for sale to the highest bidder. I see some of the new faces in the game and think I can't believe people take these sound bite celebratitions for real. I have to wonder if they to are proped up by big money trying to gain a better foot hold.