20 replies to this topic

[RonBurgundy]

For fucks sake, all of you, stop it.First and foremost, you can't possibly agree with all the ideas of one political party.Stop trying to split everything into liberal vs. conservative. democrat vs. republican.I'm going to tell you right now that neither of them have all the answers.Instead of looking at every issue through the eyes of one party or the other, try looking objectively. Shouldn't you be behind the idea that is most fit to solve the problem?Some problems require more liberal policies to fix them, and others require conservative policies.Stop whining about problems and blaming it all on past administrations or saying it's all the liberals/conservatives faults.Don't talk about problems, talk about solutions.Stop using hearsay or rumors or something you saw on tv like they're unarguable facts.Stop spitting out something Chris Matthews or James Carville said on TV. Then repeating it over and over.Hey liberals, the conservatives aren't ruining the country. Hey conservatives, liberals aren't ruining the country.Fucking Partisanship is.We can't even have a damn conversation for 10 minutes before multiple idiots come in and start mouthing off about "high and mighty liberals" or "dumb redneck republicans".We can't even vote for the best candidate anymore because of Partisanship.We're throwing our votes away if we vote for anyone outside of Republican or Democrat.We have 2 people, and we have to choose which one will do the country less harm. That is what our system has come to.And it's only because of partisanship, of people trying to fall in with a party instead of seeking facts and coming to a conclusion based on them.Stop labelling all of the things you don't like about people or their ways of thought as the opposing party. If you don't like organized religion, don't blame conservatives. If you don't like homosexuals, don't blame liberals.You're all ruining the country by seperating everything into 2 solutions. 2 ways of thought.Not to mention that most of you have come to your political affiliations by way of nothing more than misinformation and conditioning from those around you and could commit almost nothing of any factual nature to a political conversation.Just because you read The Guardian UK or have a friend who knows a congressman does not mean you are a political insider.Please, the next time you are about to say the solution to a problem should be that of your party, seek the best solution to that problem instead, be it liberal or conservative.And look at each problem we have individually.There is no blanket solution. I know that would be much easier, for one of the parties to be right, and you just had to choose the correct one, but it's not.And don't tell me you're having intelligent political discussion. Most of you have your walls built so high they could be considered national monuments.that's all i can think of right now, but there's lots more. other people please speak up.

[allinbluff35]

i see dead people

[JaysonWeber]

I already went to Poli-Sci class but.. Thanks.I'm a libertarian, I dis-agree with both sides on half of there stances for the most part.In My Mind..republicans have the right economic policies and the wrong social policiesdemocrats have the wrong economic policies and for the most part they are wrong socially BUT they are closer to what I believe than much of the republican stuff...Neither side should be right in your mind the entire way, that's just being stupid. BUT Economics mean more to me than social issues and frankly, I think furthering along Welfare and Social Medicine is wrong and if I voted for a Liberal that stuff would be on there list... Therefore I vote Conservative. Woop!Welfare Sucks.

[SAM_Hard8]

Yo Ron, fuck you. Who died and made you God?Why are all of your staments ok and someone who may have a party affiliation not?Why do you asume that because a person might take the side of a party they got that opinion from that party.SW about the FU part I still love ya.

[JaysonWeber]

SAM_Hard8 said:

Why do you asume that because a person might take the side of a party they got that opinion from that party.

Because he heard it somewhere. That's my Guess. Good Post Sam.

[RonBurgundy]

no i didnt hear it somewhere. and no ive never taken a polysci class. im just against someone who is undyingly loyal to every decision the party they have chosen makes. this was not directed at you two. this was directed at those who will not disagree with any of their parties/slants decisions. you two have probably brought the most facts to the discussions i have seen. i am all for facts. what i am against, are those who are unwilling to acknowledge the facts that benefit the other party as well as those who talk about an issue without having facts or ideas for a solution. example

[JaysonWeber]

The one thing I learned from that post... Well two.1. Canadians will be Canadians and stick there nose in our business (STAY UP THERE! (sw)2. Ignorance is bliss to those unfortunate enough to have it.

[RonBurgundy]

and some of this oneand some of this one too

[theresa113]

JaysonWeber said:

I already went to Poli-Sci class but.. Thanks.I'm a libertarian, I dis-agree with both sides on half of there stances for the most part.In My Mind..republicans have the right economic policies and the wrong social policiesdemocrats have the wrong economic policies and for the most part they are wrong socially BUT they are closer to what I believe than much of the republican stuff...Neither side should be right in your mind the entire way, that's just being stupid. BUT Economics mean more to me than social issues and frankly, I think furthering along Welfare and Social Medicine is wrong and if I voted for a Liberal that stuff would be on there list... Therefore I vote Conservative. Woop!Welfare Sucks.

Wow... A libertarian. I didn't know there were any left. I voted libertarian once, that was when I was young and I thought that if I voted libertarian some shock wave would go through DC and make both sides wake up. Ah, I miss those days of naivety.Jayson, I am not poking fun at you. There are just a lot of wackos in the libertarian party( hey, I probably was one. ) I have had to learn to vote democrat or republican based on what power the leader will hold and over what issue (social, economic, public relations, etc.) I really do wish the libertarians would get their act together. It would be great to see us change to a three party system.

[SAM_Hard8]

RonBurgundy said:

no i didnt hear it somewhere. and no ive never taken a polysci class. im just against someone who is undyingly loyal to every decision the party they have chosen makes. this was not directed at you two. this was directed at those who will not disagree with any of their parties/slants decisions. you two have probably brought the most facts to the discussions i have seen. i am all for facts. what i am against, are those who are unwilling to acknowledge the facts that benefit the other party as well as those who talk about an issue without having facts or ideas for a solution. example

Ok

[InsanityCubed]

Congratulations, you have come to one of the most fundamental truths of politics. Simply put, politics in and of itself is bad for the general population. The ability to vote means nothing, since any party we vote for is just going to screw us over in different ways. Do you ever wonder why the party system even exists? To make you feel like you have a choice, when you really have none. No matter who you vote for, your government is still going to aid the interests of those who fund them. There is one option to circumvent all this political bullscheisse, and it's pretty radical. In essence, if over 1/2 of the population refuses the vote (I don't mean sits on their couch and doesn't vote, you go to your voting station and say ''I do not endorse any of the candidates, I refuse my vote"), then the government, by law, has no power, since they have not been elected by the populace. Change must be brought about by radical measures, and while I doubt this will happen in the near future, it is something people need to be educated about. If you do not endorse any candidates in your jurisdiction, then go and refuse your vote, it will matter.

[timwakefield]

InsanityCubed said:

Congratulations, you have come to one of the most fundamental truths of politics. Simply put, politics in and of itself is bad for the general population. The ability to vote means nothing, since any party we vote for is just going to screw us over in different ways. Do you ever wonder why the party system even exists? To make you feel like you have a choice, when you really have none. No matter who you vote for, your government is still going to aid the interests of those who fund them.  There is one option to circumvent all this political bullscheisse, and it's pretty radical. In essence, if over 1/2 of the population refuses the vote (I don't mean sits on their couch and doesn't vote, you go to your voting station and say ''I do not endorse any of the candidates, I refuse my vote"), then the government, by law, has no power, since they have not been elected by the populace. Change must be brought about by radical measures, and while I doubt this will happen in the near future, it is something people need to be educated about. If you do not endorse any candidates in your jurisdiction, then go and refuse your vote, it will matter.

First of all, that "Any party we vote for is just going to screw us over" is clearly a viewpoint of somebody who is jaded and irrational. This is neither the intent nor the practice of politicians. Sure, lots of them are scumbags, but suggesting that politicians are fundamentally against the interests of the public is silly. I agree that politicians "aid the interests of those who fund them." At least half their job is getting re-elected. That is the main problem with politicians, if you ask me. But that doesn't mean that they are ONLY interested in big business and lobbying groups. And surely not all politicians are morally corrupt...why not vote for the ones who are good honest people? Everybody should vote. If you don't want to vote for the Democrat or Republican, vote for another party. Somebody has to run the damn country, and there's no better way of choosing those people than by an anonymous general election. You can't bring down the system by abstaining...you would only give slightly more power to those citizens who do vote for a candidate. A better way to do things is to support those politicians who DO have good values and ideas, or else to vote for the lesser of two evils if necessary. If I said, 'I can cut off your finger or I can cut off your hand...' both are bad options, but one is clearly the better choice. If you have to choose between say Kerry and Bush, realize that one of them is going to win with or without your vote. Why not choose the one who you deem will do a somewhat better (or somewhat less bad) job of it?

[InsanityCubed]

timwakefield said:

First of all, that "Any party we vote for is just going to screw us over" is clearly a viewpoint of somebody who is jaded and irrational. This is neither the intent nor the practice of politicians. Sure, lots of them are scumbags, but suggesting that politicians are fundamentally against the interests of the public is silly. I agree that politicians "aid the interests of those who fund them." At least half their job is getting re-elected. That is the main problem with politicians, if you ask me. But that doesn't mean that they are ONLY interested in big business and lobbying groups. And surely not all politicians are morally corrupt...why not vote for the ones who are good honest people? Everybody should vote. If you don't want to vote for the Democrat or Republican, vote for another party. Somebody has to run the damn country, and there's no better way of choosing those people than by an anonymous general election. You can't bring down the system by abstaining...you would only give slightly more power to those citizens who do vote for a candidate. A better way to do things is to support those politicians who DO have good values and ideas, or else to vote for the lesser of two evils if necessary. If I said, 'I can cut off your finger or I can cut off your hand...' both are bad options, but one is clearly the better choice. If you have to choose between say Kerry and Bush, realize that one of them is going to win with or without your vote. Why not choose the one who you deem will do a somewhat better (or somewhat less bad) job of it?

Jaded maybe, irrational? Hardly. Choosing the lesser of two evils is still choosing evil. Sure we have a "choice". A choice which suit will run our country, give more money to the rich, take more money from the poor, kill our environment more, or handle foreign policy in the most bass ackwards way possible. The problem begins and ends with the system, which gives voters control, but only within the paramaters that were set hundreds of years ago. Do you really think that the Constitution, or the BNA act, or whatever, was written with billionaire media moguls in mind? The system has made it so the only people who can get in power are those who already have it to some degree. In Canada, we recently had a PM who was not elected for months, yet he ran the country, is this right?You don't have to be morally corrupt to like money. When the oil companies are driving dump trucks of it to your door, setting you (and your children, and so on) up for life, are you going to say no? Sadly, there are no viable solutions at this point (revolution, anyone? sw), the only hope for the future is for people to be educated about the fact that they are merely a cog in the money machine, no matter how much they think they are at the controls. Discussions like this are the key, as they are too few and far between in the general public. Only when people come to understand the full picture will change be able to occur.

[timwakefield]

Cubeman, now I'm gonna take up my partisan rhetoric. If Al Gore had been inaugurated president in 2001 (as he may well have to deserved to have been), this country would be in a dramatically different state. Al Gore is no great leader along the lines of Lincoln or FDR, but he is a good, honest man. He is very concerned with the environment, an issue which the Bush administration has not only ignored, but has very well sneered at. That's just one obvious difference, and an extremely important one. Who knows what would have happened regarding Afghanistan, but I find it unlikely that we would have gotten ourselves so deeply into this mess in Iraq. We must remember that the Iraq war was not something the public was expecting...it was drudged up by our war-mongering commanders under false pretenses. After September 11th, nobody was saying "Boy we'd better get Saddam Hussein out of power or this could get worse." He was totally unconnected. This administration is extremely far right-wing. The president believes his God will protect us...he has mixed up religion with politics in a very dangerous way. A few weeks ago the president suggested that Intelligent Design should be considered as an alternative theory to natural evolution in high school classrooms. It is hard to believe that a president in this day and age could be so afraid of science, so scientifically backwards as to suggest such a thing. This is a guy who says 'let's go to Mars,' then says, 'well you know the jury is still out on evolution.' It's as if he said 'You know, we're not sure the earth actually DOES revolve around the sun, it sure looks like it's the other way around.' There is a difference between these hard-core conservatives and people like Gore and Kerry. There are a slew of differences. So I will continue to vote for those who I think will keep this country in a better state of affairs, those who prove themselves to be at least somewhat intelligent and capable. I mean, Bush owned the goddam Texas Rangers during the 90s. If the man can't even win a division, how can he run a whole nation?

[JaysonWeber]

Jayson, I am not poking fun at you. There are just a lot of wackos in the libertarian party( hey, I probably was one. ) I have had to learn to vote democrat or republican based on what power the leader will hold and over what issue (social, economic, public relations, etc.) I really do wish the libertarians would get their act together. It would be great to see us change to a three party system. I never said I VOTED Libertarian... nah that would take votes away from my second best option. So I force myself to vote republican (even though in my mind most of them are socialist in a lot of there views )But It's good to know im not the only one... We need new leadership, think people would vote for a degenerate poker player? ......

[HtotheNootch]

I voted for Bednarik for president in the last election!

[avsfan]

Well I posted in your first example so feel free to tell me anything I did that upset you. So I can learn from my mistakes.I have been very disappointed in my post recently. All I do is post stupid stuff. I feel like everything is lame. Maybe its cause my contributions aren't good. I feel I need to stop posting the crap I post. On the other hand sometimes it makes me feel better. I guess Im torn.?p.s. I don't really have politics I just follow my mind and heart.

[InsanityCubed]

timwakefield said:

Cubeman, now I'm gonna take up my partisan rhetoric. If Al Gore had been inaugurated president in 2001 (as he may well have to deserved to have been), this country would be in a dramatically different state. Al Gore is no great leader along the lines of Lincoln or FDR, but he is a good, honest man. He is very concerned with the environment, an issue which the Bush administration has not only ignored, but has very well sneered at. That's just one obvious difference, and an extremely important one. Who knows what would have happened regarding Afghanistan, but I find it unlikely that we would have gotten ourselves so deeply into this mess in Iraq. We must remember that the Iraq war was not something the public was expecting...it was drudged up by our war-mongering commanders under false pretenses. After September 11th, nobody was saying "Boy we'd better get Saddam Hussein out of power or this could get worse." He was totally unconnected. This administration is extremely far right-wing. The president believes his God will protect us...he has mixed up religion with politics in a very dangerous way. A few weeks ago the president suggested that Intelligent Design should be considered as an alternative theory to natural evolution in high school classrooms. It is hard to believe that a president in this day and age could be so afraid of science, so scientifically backwards as to suggest such a thing. This is a guy who says 'let's go to Mars,' then says, 'well you know the jury is still out on evolution.' It's as if he said 'You know, we're not sure the earth actually DOES revolve around the sun, it sure looks like it's the other way around.' There is a difference between these hard-core conservatives and people like Gore and Kerry. There are a slew of differences. So I will continue to vote for those who I think will keep this country in a better state of affairs, those who prove themselves to be at least somewhat intelligent and capable. I mean, Bush owned the goddam Texas Rangers during the 90s. If the man can't even win a division, how can he run a whole nation?

I agree with you, however "Better than Bush" should not need to be a campaign slogan. The person or group who is best fit to provide for the interests of those who elect them should lead. However, the populace needs to be properly educated in order to make an informed decision come voting time. Far too many people are now voting based on belief, or morality, whereas I don't care if my leader is an ******* sikh adulterer, as long as they do the job right. People need to remember that you're not voting for a friend, or who you want off the goddamn island, you're electing the LEADER OF YOUR COUNTRY. I wouldn't trush Bush to drive my taxi, and yet he makes decisions that affect my life (even though I'm Canadian) in a great deal of important ways. I still do not understand how a voting majority could choose someone as plain sight stupid as George W to be their leader.For my Canadian compatriots, I have two words: Steven Harper. Be afraid of what will happen if this man gets in power.

[Dirtydutch]

JaysonWeber said:

I already went to Poli-Sci class but.. Thanks.I'm a libertarian, I dis-agree with both sides on half of there stances for the most part.In My Mind..republicans have the right economic policies and the wrong social policiesdemocrats have the wrong economic policies and for the most part they are wrong socially BUT they are closer to what I believe than much of the republican stuff...Neither side should be right in your mind the entire way, that's just being stupid. BUT Economics mean more to me than social issues and frankly, I think furthering along Welfare and Social Medicine is wrong and if I voted for a Liberal that stuff would be on there list... Therefore I vote Conservative. Woop!Welfare Sucks.

I never took you for one of us J-dub. Long Live Bastiat!

[JaysonWeber]

Dirtydutch said:

I never took you for one of us J-dub. Long Live Bastiat!

Fuck Yes.