Does America need a revolution?

[P Gizzle]

deal with it. life is too short to waste it on politics!

If you care about what kind of Country and for that matter what kind of World your children will have when you're gone, then you'd be wise to "waste" a little time on Politics!

Just saying, would you agree?

you know, as long as the constitution is being upheld to the utmost it can, i will not care what world i live in. "Politics" doesn't affect my personal life because all "politics" does is waste my money.

do u agree?

[happysadfun]

No.

[OnlyAmbrose]

deal with it. life is too short to waste it on politics!

If you care about what kind of Country and for that matter what kind of World your children will have when you're gone, then you'd be wise to "waste" a little time on Politics!

Just saying, would you agree?

you know, as long as the constitution is being upheld to the utmost it can, i will not care what world i live in. "Politics" doesn't affect my personal life because all "politics" does is waste my money.

do u agree?

The constitution doesn't guarantee a good country. Sans Bill of Rights and a few amendments, all the constitution does is state what the structure of the government is going to be.

Politics DOES affect your personal life. While you're talking about the Constitution and the founding fathers and all the jazz, you might as well note that America was one of the first countries to embrace the idea of widespread political involvement. What's more, the decision these politicians make have a direct affect on your life. Taxes, for instance, among many other things. Laws. Roads. Schools.

Not to mention foreign affairs. America is nearly completely reliant on foreign nations for imports at the moment. George Washington would shake his head in pity right now if he saw how much we lean on other countries just to keep our economy putting along. The decisions of politicians affect the prices of goods (oil, automobiles, computers, etc) in OUR NATION.

Speaking of economics, what about jobs? The illegal immigration issue brings up this one as well. What decision politicians may eventually make regarding this could have a profound affect on your personal life if you are in the construction industry, for one thing. You could quite possibly lose your job.

Still think politics don't affect you?

I think that to survive America needs a big shake-up, and I think it ought to be by Americans, because if it isn't it will be by someone else and that could mean the death of the country. I'm not saying the US will just roll over an collapse in a day, but I am saying it will gradually decline. If anyone's read the Foundation novels, consider an analogy between the Galactic Empire and the US.

But I think a revolution may solve a few problems. Trouble with revolutions is that things generall sway way too far left or right, and I certainly wouldn't advocate a facist or communist revolution. But since I'm too young to vote and barely old enough to drive...

[happysadfun]

We have had two big shakeups in recent years: Katrina and 9/11. And a third, the destruction of LA by earthquake, is imminent.

[OnlyAmbrose]

We have had two big shakeups in recent years: Katrina and 9/11. And a third, the destruction of LA by earthquake, is imminent.

Clearly not the kinds of shakeups we needed. 9/11 brought the nation together for about a month, then it tore us apart as politicians quibbled over how we should handle the problem. Things such as the Patriot Act and Operation Iraqi Freedom, both of which are clearly results of 9/11, have torns us apart and divided us even further.

Katrina showed us just how disgusting our government is right now. The fact that the relief effort was poor-quality isnt what I'm talking about, it's the blame game which ensued. If I recall, the president blamed the governor of louisiana who blamed the mayor of new orleans who in turn blamed the president. And in the meantime New Orleans was still in rubble.

Both of the above mentioned shakeups were triggered by external forces- radical terrorists and Mother Nature. A "revolution" is a very different kind of shakeup, because it flows from the passions of the people of the country themselves. And personally... I think that's what we sorta need.

[strike wolf]

I agree this political warfare has torn our country apart for too long, but I don't really think a revolution will solve any of these problems.

[ksslemp]

Agreed. We're a long way from a revolution but everyone definitely needs to be more politically active. We at least need to e-mail our representatives often and express our opinions to them, and then hold them accountable on election day when they turn a deaf ear to the peoples concerns.

I understand though when citizens get frustrated and become apathetic. but that will only make the problem worse.

[OnlyAmbrose]

Agreed. We're a long way from a revolution but everyone definitely needs to be more politically active. We at least need to e-mail our representatives often and express our opinions to them, and then hold them accountable on election day when they turn a deaf ear to the peoples concerns.

I understand though when citizens get frustrated and become apathetic. but that will only make the problem worse.

Citizens become frustrated because of what they hear the politicians they voted for do. Every day on the way home from school I'll hear something NEW on the radio that makes me want to puke.

On Friday that something was that two border patrol agents were being sent to prison for the better part of their lives for trying to arrest "the victim", who happens to be a drug smuggler. Granted, politicians aren't involved with that directly, but it makes me sick to think how backward our legal system is becoming. I honestly couldn't believe it, and didn't until I went home and scanned several headlines online.

Things like that, straw by straw, add up to a very heavy burden to carry. Rest assured, this isn't how Americans felt about their country in the late '40s and early '50s, or for that matter the 1820s.

One final note-

and then hold them accountable on election day when they turn a deaf ear to the peoples concerns.

So what do we do when they ALL turn a deaf ear? The polarization of political parties into these two political camps means that politicians have to make their positions on issues a package deal.

[ksslemp]

I heard about those Border Agents too, and it makes me sick! 10 year prison terms, because someone screwed up some paperwork and that was a decision by a judge so it's up to voters to kick the SOB out! We americans have such short attention spans that it will all be forgotten in a couple of weeks.

When they ALL turn a deaf ear, we kick them all out. They all sit around strategizing on how to manipulate the voters, If you don't listen to the voters, you're out. If you put a lobbyist ahead of the voters, you're out. but they won't know WHAT the people want from them unless WE tell them.

Hell, i'd vote satan in for 1 term if he'd secure our borders!

[OnlyAmbrose]

When they ALL turn a deaf ear, we kick them all out. They all sit around strategizing on how to manipulate the voters, If you don't listen to the voters, you're out. If you put a lobbyist ahead of the voters, you're out. but they won't know WHAT the people want from them unless WE tell them.

See, I think we've reached that point. It's no longer what the voters want- it's what will get the voter to vote for you. So what it's descended to for most American voters on election day is "the lesser of two evils". Definately not the attitude which we want our voters to have when they are about to decide who the leaders of our nation will be.

So I think where we differ is simply that I think we've already past a point where our malfunctioning government can right itself. Consider the analogy of a computer. You bought a brand new computer about 3 years ago. The next year, better computers came out, but yours still ran fine and, with the right patches from the manufacturer and some computer knowledge of your own, it actually managed to run better than several brand new computers. The year after that some BRAND NEW TECHNOLOGY came out, but you were skeptical. On a hunch you decided to stick with your old computer. Turns out your hunch paid off. The new technology was ridden in bugs and everyone who bought it got majorly gipped.

Now it's your third year, and your computers parts are falling off. You've recently spend several hundred dollars replacing the video card. You got a new disk drive. You've taken it apart and put it back together so many times so many times to install parts that it's now one of the ugliest computers you've ever seen. It's slow and clunky because you haven't done a system reinstall in ages.

And what's more, new software has come out that requires a better processor than what you have. Well as most people with some computer knowledge know, you can't get a new processor without getting a new computer.

So we're sitting around with an outdated computer which is costing more to maintain than it would cost to replace. And it's not running any of the software necessary for functioning in the modern world. We need a new computer.

[ksslemp]

I understand your analogy, but i like the "Processor" we have.

We just need to delete all the worthless programs we have installed and do a defrag on the whole thing!

We need to move the day-to-day workload from the main processor to our local dedicated processors!

Well thats enough of the computer analogy, but point taken!

[OnlyAmbrose]

lol, well I'll compromise with the defrag idea

But seriously, outsting every corrupt politician out of office would, in my humble opinion, leave the halls of congress empty.

[P Gizzle]

deal with it. life is too short to waste it on politics!

If you care about what kind of Country and for that matter what kind of World your children will have when you're gone, then you'd be wise to "waste" a little time on Politics!

Just saying, would you agree?

you know, as long as the constitution is being upheld to the utmost it can, i will not care what world i live in. "Politics" doesn't affect my personal life because all "politics" does is waste my money.

do u agree?

The constitution doesn't guarantee a good country. Sans Bill of Rights and a few amendments, all the constitution does is state what the structure of the government is going to be.

Politics DOES affect your personal life. While you're talking about the Constitution and the founding fathers and all the jazz, you might as well note that America was one of the first countries to embrace the idea of widespread political involvement. What's more, the decision these politicians make have a direct affect on your life. Taxes, for instance, among many other things. Laws. Roads. Schools.

Not to mention foreign affairs. America is nearly completely reliant on foreign nations for imports at the moment. George Washington would shake his head in pity right now if he saw how much we lean on other countries just to keep our economy putting along. The decisions of politicians affect the prices of goods (oil, automobiles, computers, etc) in OUR NATION.

Speaking of economics, what about jobs? The illegal immigration issue brings up this one as well. What decision politicians may eventually make regarding this could have a profound affect on your personal life if you are in the construction industry, for one thing. You could quite possibly lose your job.

Still think politics don't affect you?

I think that to survive America needs a big shake-up, and I think it ought to be by Americans, because if it isn't it will be by someone else and that could mean the death of the country. I'm not saying the US will just roll over an collapse in a day, but I am saying it will gradually decline. If anyone's read the Foundation novels, consider an analogy between the Galactic Empire and the US.

But I think a revolution may solve a few problems. Trouble with revolutions is that things generall sway way too far left or right, and I certainly wouldn't advocate a facist or communist revolution. But since I'm too young to vote and barely old enough to drive...

what i meant was instead of wasting ur time posting messages about politics that fall on deaf ears, be with ur family.

[ksslemp]

deal with it. life is too short to waste it on politics!

If you care about what kind of Country and for that matter what kind of World your children will have when you're gone, then you'd be wise to "waste" a little time on Politics!

Just saying, would you agree?

you know, as long as the constitution is being upheld to the utmost it can, i will not care what world i live in. "Politics" doesn't affect my personal life because all "politics" does is waste my money.

do u agree?

The constitution doesn't guarantee a good country. Sans Bill of Rights and a few amendments, all the constitution does is state what the structure of the government is going to be.

Politics DOES affect your personal life. While you're talking about the Constitution and the founding fathers and all the jazz, you might as well note that America was one of the first countries to embrace the idea of widespread political involvement. What's more, the decision these politicians make have a direct affect on your life. Taxes, for instance, among many other things. Laws. Roads. Schools.

Not to mention foreign affairs. America is nearly completely reliant on foreign nations for imports at the moment. George Washington would shake his head in pity right now if he saw how much we lean on other countries just to keep our economy putting along. The decisions of politicians affect the prices of goods (oil, automobiles, computers, etc) in OUR NATION.

Speaking of economics, what about jobs? The illegal immigration issue brings up this one as well. What decision politicians may eventually make regarding this could have a profound affect on your personal life if you are in the construction industry, for one thing. You could quite possibly lose your job.

Still think politics don't affect you?

I think that to survive America needs a big shake-up, and I think it ought to be by Americans, because if it isn't it will be by someone else and that could mean the death of the country. I'm not saying the US will just roll over an collapse in a day, but I am saying it will gradually decline. If anyone's read the Foundation novels, consider an analogy between the Galactic Empire and the US.

But I think a revolution may solve a few problems. Trouble with revolutions is that things generall sway way too far left or right, and I certainly wouldn't advocate a facist or communist revolution. But since I'm too young to vote and barely old enough to drive...

what i meant was instead of wasting ur time posting messages about politics that fall on deaf ears, be with ur family.

RIGHT!, I'm sure that's what you really meant. Thanks for straightening us out.

Is life too short to bother with Voting? because that's a political act!
What if i take the whole family with me when we Vote?

[thejackofhearts]

the only problem with the popular vote is that the popular vote doesn't count for squat when the electoral college casts the votes that actually elect the president.

When Ross Perot ran as a third party candidate he recieved twenty percent of the popular vote, so you'd think he would have gotten twenty percent of the electoral college votes, but he did not recieve even one vote.

[subdork]

So what it's descended to for most American voters on election day is "the lesser of two evils". Definately not the attitude which we want our voters to have when they are about to decide who the leaders of our nation will be.

How did those two evils make it onto the ballot? because only about a fourth of eligible voters vote in the primaries... that means (most likely) the 12% farthest to the left and the 12% farthest to the right are deciding who we get to pick from. Well, that's not even true... if there are 4 candidates in a primary, then you really only need 30% of that 12% of the people. So it could be the 4% furthest to the right and the 4% furthest to the left that are picking the candidates for the ballot.

You don't need new parties. You don't need revolution. You simply need to vote in whichever party primary you want. If the middle got up off their asses, they could easily hijack both parties.

So far, the year's rock-bottom has come in Virginia, which did not have a 2002 primary. The June 13 Democratic Senate primary drew national attention and was open to all Virginians, regardless of their party. Fewer than 4% of more than 4.5 million eligible voters showed up to nominate former Navy secretary Jim Webb to face Sen. George Allen in November.

http://www.usatoday.com/news/washington ... outs_x.htm
http://be-think.typepad.com/bethink/vot ... index.html

[OnlyAmbrose]

So what it's descended to for most American voters on election day is "the lesser of two evils". Definately not the attitude which we want our voters to have when they are about to decide who the leaders of our nation will be.

How did those two evils make it onto the ballot? because only about a fourth of eligible voters vote in the primaries... that means (most likely) the 12% farthest to the left and the 12% farthest to the right are deciding who we get to pick from. Well, that's not even true... if there are 4 candidates in a primary, then you really only need 30% of that 12% of the people. So it could be the 4% furthest to the right and the 4% furthest to the left that are picking the candidates for the ballot.

You don't need new parties. You don't need revolution. You simply need to vote in whichever party primary you want. If the middle got up off their asses, they could easily hijack both parties.

Don't I wish I was old enough to vote? ;P

'til then I'll just enjoy tinkering with revolutionary thoughts, lol

On a more serious note, your point is well taken. Tha USA today article makes it pretty clear... trouble is, there's rarely much of a hype over primaries because more moderate candidates don't get major party funding/backing, whereas the favorite candidates of the major parties do get some extra airtime, and thus it is THEIR names that the voter knows at primaries, if the voter goes to primaries at all. So the "package deal" politics remains.

[subdork]

Don't I wish I was old enough to vote? ;P

'til then I'll just enjoy tinkering with revolutionary thoughts, lol

On a more serious note, your point is well taken. Tha USA today article makes it pretty clear... trouble is, there's rarely much of a hype over primaries because more moderate candidates don't get major party funding/backing, whereas the favorite candidates of the major parties do get some extra airtime, and thus it is THEIR names that the voter knows at primaries, if the voter goes to primaries at all. So the "package deal" politics remains.

I don't think any money comes from party coffers when it comes to primaries. The only way to get on a primary ballot is to either be the incumbent or to get enough signatures. And while it's true that big compaign donations can enable a candidate to have more staffers out there trying to get signatures, most of those staffers (at the local level) are volunteers. As far as advertising goes, here in upstate New York the only candidate in the most recent primaries that had any significant advertising for the primary was Eliot Spitzer who did not need any of it really. Most of the advertising dollars come from the parties after the primaries are over. And Lord knows that's all I see between innings during the World Series

My advice remains: Read a newspaper comparison. Visit the candidates' websites. Vote in the primaries!
I know, I know. It's a lot easier to just complain about how George Bush hates black people or how Nancy Pelosi is going to send this country back 20 years economically. And if voting in a Republican or Democratic primary just makes you feel too dirty, then just vote Libertarian
http://www.lp.org/article_85.shtml

[vtmarik]

The primaries are kinda useless when all but one of the candidates pulls out before the final primary elections.

Hell, i'dve voted for Sharpton if he'd stuck it out. It would've been an interesting experience.

[subdork]

The primaries are kinda useless when all but one of the candidates pulls out before the final primary elections.

Hell, i'dve voted for Sharpton if he'd stuck it out. It would've been an interesting experience.

In presidential campaigns, most candidates do pull out after a few states have cast their ballots... But people very rarely drop out of local (congressional, etc.) primaries. And most of the time national politicians are born at the local level.

[vtmarik]

In presidential campaigns, most candidates do pull out after a few states have cast their ballots... But people very rarely drop out of local (congressional, etc.) primaries. And most of the time national politicians are born at the local level.

That's true. Unfortunately those same politicians who were so full of piss and vinegar at the outset of their political career are jaded, cynical functionaries by the time they read Ye Olde Congress....e

There are some exceptions, but these are rare and are usually short lived, take for example RFK. Great man, great ideas, shot by Sirhan Sirhan after a speech.

[ksslemp]

I might vote Libertarian, if their candidates were'nt all wackos.

They all remind me of L. Ron Hubbard.

And voting for Sharpton would have been like voting for Marion Berry.
Get Real!

[vtmarik]

Obviously you voted your Sense of Humor out of office. *da-dum-psh!*

How was they wacko?

[subdork]

Obviously you voted your Sense of Humor out of office. *da-dum-psh!*

How was they wacko?

Hehe, there does tend to be some wacko ideas coming out of the libertarian party... like privatizing the police... But I trust that since libertarians wouldn't have complete power that their only effect would be to decrease government spending. yay... but this is only my own political viewpoint.... feel free to completely ignore it.

And while most good politicians seem to get sifted out as you travel from the local level to the national level, I still believe that this is primarily due to people not voting in the primaries.

[vtmarik]

Hehe, there does tend to be some wacko ideas coming out of the libertarian party... like privatizing the police... But I trust that since libertarians wouldn't have complete power that their only effect would be to decrease government spending. yay... but this is only my own political viewpoint.... feel free to completely ignore it.

Well, yeah. Some are a bit extreme, but private security firms in Vegas do a pretty good job protecting casinos.... Food for thought maybe...

And while most good politicians seem to get sifted out as you travel from the local level to the national level, I still believe that this is primarily due to people not voting in the primaries.

Pun not intended I hope...

But yeah, if more people voted in the primaries, candidates might stick it out longer... Maybe...