Eugefunk84
Member
+48|6526
Ok, I really really hate the amount of finger pointing I see on these forums about the dems or the reps and who is responsible for whats going on in Iraq. The truth is, everyone is at fault. This is a contry founded on the principle that everyone has a voice. Now it's all fine and dandy that you can sit there and say the dems are pussies and they are undermining the war in iraq, but what the fuck are YOU doing to help our troops? You can say the reps are gung ho, short sighted warhawks, but I dont see you doing anythign about it either.

The best thing for this country would be to abolish the current bipartisan system and just have ONE party. One party with a lot of grey area. Why all this polarization to one extreme or the other? What happened to moderation? Until something like this happens, the politicians in this country are just going to shoot for getting their man in power and theyre gonna do that by catering to the people. Like the reps wanted to goto war after 9/11, which won bush the next election. Now everyone wants to pul out and the dems use that as their platform. The truth is they dont really care about one cause or another, they just want to get in power. When it breaks down to one party, there is much less personal gain to be gotten, and I think only then will politicians start acting for teh true benefit of this nation.

Discuss?
deeznutz1245
Connecticut: our chimps are stealin yo' faces.
+483|6485|Connecticut
No Shit?

Last edited by deeznutz1245 (2007-03-25 18:00:34)

Malloy must go
Liberal-Sl@yer
Certified BF2S Asshole
+131|6448|The edge of sanity
It is, has , and always will be until we get more parties in goverment
Parker
isteal
+1,452|6386|The Gem Saloon
true.
when george washington left the office in his last speach he warned against political parties and the corruption involved.
nothing can be done......there was a thread talking about another revolution to deal with this issue, but the truth is we are powerless.
bottom line......it sucks, but thats how it is.
Eugefunk84
Member
+48|6526

Liberal-Sl@yer wrote:

It is, has , and always will be until we get more parties in goverment
I'm argueing that what we need is one party, or rather the lack of any party, and instead just ideals, which can not be attributed to one party or another, making for much less polarization.
deeznutz1245
Connecticut: our chimps are stealin yo' faces.
+483|6485|Connecticut

Liberal-Sl@yer wrote:

It is, has , and always will be until we get more no parties in goverment
Malloy must go
ATG
Banned
+5,233|6521|Global Command

Parker wrote:

true.
when george washington left the office in his last speach he warned against political parties and the corruption involved.
nothing can be done......there was a thread talking about another revolution to deal with this issue, but the truth is we are powerless.
bottom line......it sucks, but thats how it is.
If enough people banded together we wouldn't be powerless. I have extra weapons.
Stealth42o
She looked 18 to me officer
+175|6664
You just figuring this out?
Eugefunk84
Member
+48|6526
nah, just thoguht id voice my opinion on things, smartass
Parker
isteal
+1,452|6386|The Gem Saloon

ATG wrote:

Parker wrote:

true.
when george washington left the office in his last speach he warned against political parties and the corruption involved.
nothing can be done......there was a thread talking about another revolution to deal with this issue, but the truth is we are powerless.
bottom line......it sucks, but thats how it is.
If enough people banded together we wouldn't be powerless. I have extra weapons.
as do i, however you and i would be left holding our dicks with an arsenal that was supposed to be used by everyone that left us in said position.
however this is dangerous talk, i dont need any black helis or those guys responsible for 9-11 to come after me.....
ATG
Banned
+5,233|6521|Global Command
Agreed.


Hillary for President!
Parker
isteal
+1,452|6386|The Gem Saloon
amen to that!
/wrists
ATG
Banned
+5,233|6521|Global Command
dousesselfwithgasoline/runsscreaming
Skorpy-chan
Member
+127|6337|Twyford, UK
So, you want soviet communism in America? That's what a one-party system IS. Idiot.

Mind, there will be no political parties at all when I conquer the world; only a stratified dictatorship.
And idiots like the OP here will be ground up for fertilliser.
Eugefunk84
Member
+48|6526

Skorpy-chan wrote:

So, you want soviet communism in America? That's what a one-party system IS. Idiot.

Mind, there will be no political parties at all when I conquer the world; only a stratified dictatorship.
And idiots like the OP here will be ground up for fertilliser.
wow, you are a brilliant guy. why dont you go fuck yourself for a minute? i grew up in communist russia dickhead, and what im suggesting is nothing like that
Turquoise
O Canada
+1,596|6397|North Carolina

Eugefunk84 wrote:

Ok, I really really hate the amount of finger pointing I see on these forums about the dems or the reps and who is responsible for whats going on in Iraq. The truth is, everyone is at fault. This is a contry founded on the principle that everyone has a voice. Now it's all fine and dandy that you can sit there and say the dems are pussies and they are undermining the war in iraq, but what the fuck are YOU doing to help our troops? You can say the reps are gung ho, short sighted warhawks, but I dont see you doing anythign about it either.

The best thing for this country would be to abolish the current bipartisan system and just have ONE party. One party with a lot of grey area. Why all this polarization to one extreme or the other? What happened to moderation? Until something like this happens, the politicians in this country are just going to shoot for getting their man in power and theyre gonna do that by catering to the people. Like the reps wanted to goto war after 9/11, which won bush the next election. Now everyone wants to pul out and the dems use that as their platform. The truth is they dont really care about one cause or another, they just want to get in power. When it breaks down to one party, there is much less personal gain to be gotten, and I think only then will politicians start acting for teh true benefit of this nation.

Discuss?
I prefer a different approach.  Either we need more parties to reflect the subtleties of viewpoints among liberals, conservatives, and other groups, or....  we need to get rid of parties altogether.  As George Washington once said, "Political parties only serve to divide the people."  It would be far better if we voted for individuals rather than thinking in terms of parties.
ATG
Banned
+5,233|6521|Global Command

Skorpy-chan wrote:

So, you want soviet communism in America? That's what a one-party system IS. Idiot.

Mind, there will be no political parties at all when I conquer the world; only a stratified dictatorship.
And idiots like the OP here will be ground up for fertilliser.
Careful,
you may receive one of these:   https://i16.tinypic.com/2ur2jk7.gif
Spearhead
Gulf coast redneck hippy
+731|6682|Tampa Bay Florida
Actually there are plenty of people who have admitted mistakes have been made.

Just because one person wants something to be done doesn't mean it will get done.  Majority rules, it's a democracy.  Only the combined efforts of many people can change something.  There are Reps and Dems who want to do things differently but can't, because they don't have the majorities support.
Spark
liquid fluoride thorium reactor
+874|6667|Canberra, AUS

Eugefunk84 wrote:

Liberal-Sl@yer wrote:

It is, has , and always will be until we get more parties in goverment
I'm argueing that what we need is one party, or rather the lack of any party, and instead just ideals, which can not be attributed to one party or another, making for much less polarization.
And what's to stop that party going ultra-corrupt, ultra-authoritarian like it has in North Korea (by far the best example)?
The paradox is only a conflict between reality and your feeling what reality ought to be.
~ Richard Feynman
konfusion
mostly afk
+480|6542|CH/BR - in UK

Joining them all into one party sounds like one big communist movement, all you need now is a dictator. I'd say get more parties, to urge each other on, to bring up different arguments, so that more ideas can be represented...

-konfusion
Bubbalo
The Lizzard
+541|6554
For the last fucking time:

Stalinism is not Communism, a truly Communist nation has not government!
notorious
Nay vee, bay bee.
+1,396|6739|The United Center

Bubbalo wrote:

For the last fucking time:

Stalinism is not Communism, a truly Communist nation has not government!
Truth.
Superglueman
Member
+21|6352|The Great South Land

Eugefunk84 wrote:

Ok, I really really hate the amount of finger pointing I see on these forums about the dems or the reps and who is responsible for whats going on in Iraq. The truth is, everyone is at fault. This is a contry founded on the principle that everyone has a voice. Now it's all fine and dandy that you can sit there and say the dems are pussies and they are undermining the war in iraq, but what the fuck are YOU doing to help our troops? You can say the reps are gung ho, short sighted warhawks, but I dont see you doing anythign about it either.

The best thing for this country would be to abolish the current bipartisan system and just have ONE party. One party with a lot of grey area. Why all this polarization to one extreme or the other? What happened to moderation? Until something like this happens, the politicians in this country are just going to shoot for getting their man in power and theyre gonna do that by catering to the people. Like the reps wanted to goto war after 9/11, which won bush the next election. Now everyone wants to pul out and the dems use that as their platform. The truth is they dont really care about one cause or another, they just want to get in power. When it breaks down to one party, there is much less personal gain to be gotten, and I think only then will politicians start acting for teh true benefit of this nation.

Discuss?
1 party? Do you really think 1 party would act honestly...what would keep them honest..no fear of election, no fear of replacment..no fear...sounds like theres some communist sympathisers in the US...
Braddock
Agitator
+916|6282|Éire
More parties would mean a higher possibility of coalition Governments and thus a greater need for co operation and compromise between parties. This would be good as there would be less scope for extreme right or extreme left parties getting absolute control of the Government. We have many situations like this throughout Europe and they've been discussed in other threads and many Americans have argued against this type of political system, a lot of people see moderation as stagnation.
R0lyP0ly
Member
+161|6646|USA

Superglueman wrote:

Eugefunk84 wrote:

Ok, I really really hate the amount of finger pointing I see on these forums about the dems or the reps and who is responsible for whats going on in Iraq. The truth is, everyone is at fault. This is a contry founded on the principle that everyone has a voice. Now it's all fine and dandy that you can sit there and say the dems are pussies and they are undermining the war in iraq, but what the fuck are YOU doing to help our troops? You can say the reps are gung ho, short sighted warhawks, but I dont see you doing anythign about it either.

The best thing for this country would be to abolish the current bipartisan system and just have ONE party. One party with a lot of grey area. Why all this polarization to one extreme or the other? What happened to moderation? Until something like this happens, the politicians in this country are just going to shoot for getting their man in power and theyre gonna do that by catering to the people. Like the reps wanted to goto war after 9/11, which won bush the next election. Now everyone wants to pul out and the dems use that as their platform. The truth is they dont really care about one cause or another, they just want to get in power. When it breaks down to one party, there is much less personal gain to be gotten, and I think only then will politicians start acting for teh true benefit of this nation.

Discuss?
1 party? Do you really think 1 party would act honestly...what would keep them honest..no fear of election, no fear of replacment..no fear...sounds like theres some communist sympathisers in the US...
correctamundo! One party = much more personal gain to be gotten; after all, you've got nobody to challenge you! I do, however, agree that politicians these days (not just Ameriacan ones) are in for power rather than causes.

Unfortunately, I don't think any number of parties, or lack thereof, will solve what is rampant in every politician -- human greed. Power is insatiable, and, as the case is in America for sure, money reigns supreme.

As for the most effective government, Communism would prove to be a good idea, bar that little thing I mentioned earlier - greed. Communism has not been fully applied to any country, any where, at any time. Sorry, but it just hasn't. I think a hybrid between the United States' and Britains' democracy models would be the best, given todays world. America is too democratic, whatwith the smallest, most infintesimal fraction of a constituency having a voice in certain issues, BUT I also believe Britains party discipline and disproportionate representation, while definitely admirable in the fact that it is can and is applied and obviously works, can sometimes be a factor motivating some to believe that Britain isn't as much of a Democracy as some would choose to think it is.

Finally, Politics in America are f*cked, not is f*cked. Just though i'd clear that up.

Board footer

Privacy Policy - © 2024 Jeff Minard