|
|
Post by horsesoldier176 on Oct 2, 2009 15:20:34 GMT -5
Brought over from weapons section. Comrade Sgt., I am afraid that our countrymen's attention span is too short for it to make a difference. I would be tickled to be wrong on this though. Yuri Tovarisch boyesh; One year ago, I would have agreed with you, but the fact that we have had tea parties in April, and again in September, and smaller ones throughout the summer, and that they are growing in size, and scope causes me to suspect that something deeper has been struck here. I think an increasing number of U.S. citizens are upset by what is being done to them, by the government/political machine. Politicians, and the increasingly fringe, (former main stream) media are desperately trying to ignore this, or make fun of it. The more they do that, the angrier they make the American people. I have had neighbors, whom I have known for 15 years, who never once expressed a political, social, or economic point of view before, come to me asking how they can register to vote, and what they can do to get involved in this 'situation" I see this as the awakening of the formerly silent majority. They are waking up, and they are pissed! I think 2010 could be a very interesting election in the U.S. Perhaps we should move this topic to Heated Discussions" Even though, it isn't heated, it is political, so perhaps it should go there! Boridin |
|
|
|
Post by dixieflyer on Oct 2, 2009 17:09:35 GMT -5
I agree comrade sgt. In my old age, I shy away from face to face political discussions with friends, neighbors, and co-workers. Once bitten, twice shy. As I said though, I would be tickled to be wrong and have you be right!
Yuri
|
|
|
|
Post by vsahdneek on Oct 2, 2009 22:33:32 GMT -5
I agree with the Otryada Serzhant 100%!
time we purged the duma and party of counter-American Revolutionary scum!
Vlad
|
|
|
|
Post by horsesoldier176 on Oct 5, 2009 14:29:41 GMT -5
I also see the two power parties growing increasingly more like each other, and working together to protect their fiefdom.
I honestly think the national balance of political power is shifting.
Boridin
|
|
|
|
Post by dixieflyer on Oct 5, 2009 14:44:06 GMT -5
I've said for years that I think the folks from both parties buy their suits at the same store. I can see little to honestly separate them from each other.
Yuri
|
|
|
|
Post by vsahdneek on Oct 5, 2009 22:32:30 GMT -5
It is the bougeosie banksters that pull the chains of both their sled teams of lapdogs that must be sent to the ditch!
I propose another system, include an option for people to vote 'none of the above' but make everyone register, and an option to say that their vote always goes to their party if they fail to attend, but can be changed if they go to the polls and actually pull levers.
Then all who can vote will have votes that count, no absentee ballots needed unless you are voting outside your party... but if the 'none of the above' wins in any election, the candidates go to the ditch and there is a random draft of a person from that district of voting age and they become the office holder. Based on my view of politics, it is unlikely they could do worse than most of the candidates of these bankster serving parties.
Volodymyr
|
|
|
|
Post by horsesoldier176 on Oct 6, 2009 14:00:09 GMT -5
I would not agree to executing lousy politicians, unless there is treason involved (and, honestly, a good argument could be made, but that is a separate issue), anyway, I do agree with "None of the Above". I would say, if None of the Above wins, then none of the named candidates win, and all of them are removed from the ballot, and all new candidates must put forth their names, and start the process all over again. All of the candidates who lost in a none of the above win, can not run for the office they lost, or any higher office again. They can run for a lower/lesser office, but must win that office, serve at least one full term before they can try to go higher again.
If a state , or national office is involved in a none of the above election, then the state, or federal body affected can not begin business until the new election is concluded. What I mean by this is, say a federal senator, or congressman's race is won by NotA (None of the Above), then all new candidates from any party, or individual who can meet the criteria may run for this now vacant seat. Until that seat is legitimately filled BY ELECTION, then the federal senate, or house can not be sworn in, and begin doing business. This will "encourage" all parties involved to get on the ball, and get a new election completed quickly.
I would also like to see recall available to all states, and offices. For those not familiar with "Recall", it is a process by which the voters of a district, state, or even the nation, would be able to, in essence impeach any office holder they are unsatisfied with, prior to the next scheduled election for that office.
Just a reminder, Arnold Schwarzenegger became the Gov of CA because his predecessor was recalled by the citizens of CA. I would like to see this option for every office across the entire nation.
Boridin
|
|
|
|
Post by vsahdneek on Oct 6, 2009 14:37:52 GMT -5
Good ideas all around!
But I think the ditch should be an option, therefore only really serious people who are duty minded would run. Since any soldier knows he may die in combat to serve his or her country, why shouldn't politicians face the same fate for their failure to excercise proper 'tactics' and CYA? The world will never run out of politicians until they understand the seriousness of their offices and the consequences of their actions. They should be just as aware that their failures mean doom just as any soldier knows such risks.
Esp since it is their class of people that so often send military and emergency service workers to their doom.
It just might give them a better sense of duty, honor, country if they realized they could lose their life in a political contest, just like a soldier can lose their life in a military contest.
And of course it would 'thin the herd' of the worst of the losers! LOL!
No real loss to the rest of us.
Recalls could have another fate, like exile or a stretch in a penal colony.
Until politicians are taught to learn there are consequences for their failures to serve, they will continue to be the villainous hive of scum and wretchness they have become!
We can start by making legislators part time employees with no benefits that work only 6 months out of the year... they spend half their time raising campaign funds as it is anyway.
And why have 2 Senators per state? a waste of 1/2 that payroll. And have 1 rep per 1 mil citizens to reduce the House by a third to 300. And term limits with no retirement income
beyond a 401k like most other Americans, matching dollar.
They should never get more $ or bennies than the average joe and josephine so they know what we go through.
We may have to have a Const - Convention to do this, I realize. But it might be worth it.
Volodymyr
|
|
|
|
Post by horsesoldier176 on Oct 9, 2009 10:12:50 GMT -5
The drawback to a new Constitutional Convention, is what could be taken away from what we already have. If there were a way to ensure that any results from the convention can not remove existing rights, or modify existing rights, I would be willing to consider it, but we already know that the government class ignores the constitution at will, so why would they obey any new rules.
It is an interesting "Intellectual" exercise, but it is just that, and intellectual exercise, and nothing more.
Boridin
|
|
|
|
Post by velodya on Oct 10, 2009 19:51:07 GMT -5
What I've always found intriguing is the technical illegitimacy of our government. The Constitution really has no standing in the strictest sense since the Articles of Confederation were not replaced legally.
History sure is a funny thing.
|
|
|
|
Post by velodya on Oct 11, 2009 7:17:40 GMT -5
I suppose legality varies in the eye of the beholder, but I do affirm that it was at the time illegal. Since the conventions were not called or approved by the congress, and the representatives weren't elected, it was almost a bloodless coup.
I like our Constitution, but I do think it opened the door to problems we have today.
|
|
|
|
Post by crazydima on Oct 12, 2009 11:34:29 GMT -5
I like our Constitution, but I do think it opened the door to problems we have today. Tovarisch, I disagree. Many of the problems we have today are a result of our elected politicians not adhering to the Constitution. Over the years(especially recent years) it has been violated repeatedly by some very unsavory folks: Violation of the 1st Amendment- Freedom of speech -"McCain-Feingold Act" is just on example. Violation of 2nd amendment - Too many to list but look at D.C. and Chicago to start with!!!! FOID cards are another good one. Violation of 10th Amendment - Just look at Social Security and the current debate over health care to see what not to let the FEDs handle. The men who wrote the Constitution chose their words very carefully and its meaning is very clear. Sadly our culture has lost its ability to read and comprehend the content of such writings and so others have taken advantage of this to subvert the Constitution to suit their own agendas. A classic example everyone should be able to recall involves the intentional blurring of the 1st Amendment's addressing the "Freedom of Religion" into "Freedom from Religion." Thus the attempt by some to intentionally deceive the electorate that the Constitution contains the phrase "Separation of Church and State" when no such thing exists in the Constitution. An 1802 letter written by Thomas Jefferson is far from being the Constitution and even at that he did not endorse actions to keep all aspects of religion out of government. We also have judges(un-elected)(unaccountable) who are overstepping their bounds by making law rather than interpreting it. Too many examples to list here. In the end it is really the fault of the apathetic electorate(US Citizens) for allowing this to happen by continually avoiding taking part in the political and judicial process and or by those who willingly sell their souls for a piece of the political pie(government jobs, favors, etc.) promised by our representatives if we elect them to office. Until we the people decide to take back our country we have nobody to blame but ourselves for what we have upon our plates at the political table. I fear that Obama and the ilk he has brought with him has taken our already corrupt government(Dems and Repubs) and flushed it even further down the drain into the sewers of political crap. Barrack Hussein Obama and our congress should be ashamed of the course they have set for our beloved Republic. May God protect us from all of our enemies both foreign and DOMESTIC! Sincerely, Dima (over 200 years and we are still going strong despite our politicians) |
|
|
|
Post by dixieflyer on Oct 12, 2009 18:15:13 GMT -5
Well said Dima!!!
Yuri
|
|
|
|
Post by velodya on Oct 13, 2009 5:59:19 GMT -5
By opened the door I mean to express my distrust of federalism. I tend to believe strongly in Jefferson's anti-federalist ideals, and feel that today's government is federalism run amok. Its not the fault of any one party, both are just taking us further down the road started by the federalists. Obama himself isn't really much better or worse than any politician. The socialism and doom & gloom people are wrong because not only has he not thrown anyone in gulags and all that, but he hasn't done anything at all. This is just federalist ideals allowed to grow unchecked for hundreds of years: Big government, fewer rights, etc. Its the inevitable conclusion to placing the people subservient to the government rather than the other way around.
The only check to federalism was our bill of rights (thank you Madison), but our politicians have no qualms about overlooking it.
|
|
|
|
Post by velodya on Oct 13, 2009 11:38:50 GMT -5
Say what ye will tovarisch, but I'm convinced we wouldn't be in this boat if we were more decentralized.
|
|
Comrade Sgt.,
