Forum
#Topics
+Start a topic
?Search __________________________________

-Log In
-Register
Can/will Obama win a second term?
Log In to post a reply
Pages: 12 – [ Previous | 15 6 7 8 9 10 | Next ]

View: flat \ threaded
________________\________________________________________________\______________________________________

cyberpainter
cyberpainter
5922 posts

Re: de fault

Maybe your word mayhem had a meaning to me that was not intended, I think of it as total destructive chaos, but you may not have meant a widespread destructive force. I'm sure there is much truth in what you witnessed and wrote. You put that one sentence in there sandwiched between your assessment of Carter, threading them together. And that Carter "lowered the prestige and perceived political power of the US"...

Perhaps he was a bit like Obama in some ways, trying to mend things others broke. No one is every happy with the results. The hawks think they have a good formula, but hopefully there are other ways.

Dec 21, 2011, 07:10


________________\________________________________________________\______________________________________

Psi-Phi
Psi-Phi
182 posts

Re: de fault

cyberpainter wrote:
Maybe your word mayhem had a meaning to me that was not intended, I think of it as total destructive chaos, but you may not have meant a widespread destructive force.

Yes! That's it. Localized, episodic, spontaneous, more the mayhem of bank robberies than the chaos of anarchy that topples governments. Nonetheless, it happened so often in so many cities that it was alarming to most Americans at the time, and seemed like a harbinger of doom to many others, even the beginning of the end of the world as we know it to a frightened few. (Hmmmm!)

cyberpainter wrote:
You put that one sentence in there sandwiched between your assessment of Carter, threading them together.

Yes. I confessed already to leaving out that period. Mayhem ensued. (Punctuation matters!)

Cyberpainte wrote:
And that Carter "lowered the prestige and perceived political power of the US"...

Well, yes. Experiments never 'fail.' They merely have an 'outcome.' In my opinion, the results of many of Carter's experiments exacerbated the very problems he (may have) hoped to solve. (The road to Hell is paved with good intentions.)

Cyberpainte wrote:
The hawks think they have a good formula, but hopefully there are other ways.

V.O.T.E. -(Victory Only Through Education) has been the Masthead Motto for over 30 years of "Friends of Freedom and Justice," (one of my Constitutional educational publications.) We are dedicated to the proposition that the Ballot Box is in all ways superior to the Bullet Box.

A Republic requires an informed electorate in order to remain a (True) Republic. Without that, it can all too easily become an Evil Empire.

Dec 21, 2011, 15:53


________________\________________________________________________\______________________________________

JS
JS
489 posts

Re: de fault

Psi-Phi wrote:


A Republic requires an informed electorate in order to remain a (True) Republic. Without that, it can all too easily become an Evil Empire.


That's right. If the vote of an ignorant is equal to the vote of an informed, no real progress can happen. Democracy as we know it is not such a good thing.

Dec 21, 2011, 23:03


________________\________________________________________________\______________________________________

Cheeso
Cheeso
642 posts

Re: de fault

JS wrote:
Psi-Phi wrote:


A Republic requires an informed electorate in order to remain a (True) Republic. Without that, it can all too easily become an Evil Empire.


That's right. If the vote of an ignorant is equal to the vote of an informed, no real progress can happen. Democracy as we know it is not such a good thing.



Democracy is great. It's on the rise, and it's not dying anytime soon. And it's certainly not going to be replaced by...well, you know...

Dec 22, 2011, 07:00


________________\________________________________________________\______________________________________

Mu Mu
Mu Mu
2778 posts

Re: de fault

JS wrote:


That's right. If the vote of an ignorant is equal to the vote of an informed, no real progress can happen. Democracy as we know it is not such a good thing.



it's the best option available.

Dec 22, 2011, 17:56


________________\________________________________________________\______________________________________

phony pony2
11 posts

Re: Can/will Obama win a second term?

I dont see any GOP dudes with 1/2 the charisma. Still, Obama's not gonna change a thing.

Dec 24, 2011, 04:37


________________\________________________________________________\______________________________________

Psi-Phi
Psi-Phi
182 posts

Re: de fault

JS wrote:
That's right. If the vote of an ignorant is equal to the vote of an informed, no real progress can happen. Democracy as we know it is not such a good thing.


The Vote of each Voter by Right must be equal.

There is no changing that, and that is the way it should be. Must be. Especially for any form of government that claims to be of Law.

Of all the problems of government and politics and civilization, for that matter, that is not the problem. Even ignorance and stupidity only facilitate and exacerbate the problem, which is unrighteous dominion.

That is to say, the endemic, self-perpetuating System of Criminality that infests, corrupts, and ultimately destroys people, leaders and nations wherever it is tolerated or ignored, much less Accepted as Standard Operating Procedure.

What's wrong in the United States, for example, is not the idea or concept or system established by the Constitution, but that our government has gradually, over the last 100 years at least, by means of adopting routine policies and practices indistinguishable from the Mafia, or any other well organized, ongoing criminal enterprise.

It operates by coercion and extortion, with a multiplicity of 'laws' and corruption of those former guardians of Freedom and Justice, from cops and judges to bureaucrats and congressmen.

It does this with almost complete complicity by the mass media, who fool most of the people most of the time, and all the people at least some of the time, into believing the opposite of what is actually going on right in front of their faces.

BECAUSE they can still Vote, BECAUSE all the old mechanisms of Democracy SEEM to be in place just like in the good old days, people don't seem to notice that the Candidates, with rare exception, are preselected by the Powers That Be so that no matter which one of them is 'elected' the agenda remains the same, Power to the Elite.

Given that some of the most murderously evil and tyrannical regimes among the nations of the modern age named themselves something along the lines of 'The People's Democratic Republic' of this, that, or the other, it would be useful to consider the actual root meanings of those words.

Commonly used as interchangeable synonyms, the words 'Republic' and 'Democracy' do not share the same definition or meaning in the first place, and in the second place, when combined with the word 'People' as if to imply 'of, by and for' and 'power derived from' is worse than a lie. It is in fact a deadly cruel joke when combined in the same breath with names like Uganda or China or Iran, etc.

I think I'll start another Topic about this.

Dec 24, 2011, 21:05


________________\________________________________________________\______________________________________

Psi-Phi
Psi-Phi
182 posts

Re: de fault

Mu Mu wrote:
it's the best option available.


Wow. The degree to which I agree and disagree with the above statement would not fit on a bumper sticker. Or even a billboard.

Actually, I began the above post to reply to this one rather than the other one.

I'll start a new Topic, and answer this there.

Dec 24, 2011, 21:12


________________\________________________________________________\______________________________________

JS
JS
489 posts

Re: de fault

Psi-Phi wrote:


The Vote of each Voter by Right must be equal.

There is no changing that, and that is the way it should be. Must be. Especially for any form of government that claims to be of Law.


Why is that so?

In order to drive a car, one must get a driver's license, and this license shows that the person have at least the minimal abilities and knowledge required to drive a vehicle.

If no license were required for driving a car, it would be chaos on the roads.

I can't see why the same reasoning can't be applied to voting: a voter's license given to those who have met some minimal and basic criteria.

Yes, all men are equals, One man one vote: that's the fair thing to do. If someone can't vote, it's unfair, or so they say.

Well, is it really fair when the voice of an educated and cultivated person is not worth more than the voice of an illiterate dropout?

Is it unfair to forbid someone from driving a car if he can't get his driver's license?

Dec 27, 2011, 05:28


________________\________________________________________________\______________________________________

and0rod4
692 posts

Re: de fault

i agree with that. i mean if you dont know jack about politics. there is no room for your vote.

if people were more educated, elections wouldn't be rigged by over-spin.

but what would be the criteria to be eligable to vote amongst the common man?

dunno. x

Dec 27, 2011, 05:40

Pages: 12 – [ Previous | 15 6 7 8 9 10 | Next ]

add a reply to this topic
________________________________________________________________\______________________________________
stereolab table Index