Feingold to call for rare presidential censure

[rmnunez]

All these people who can't find fit within the standardized Democratic or Republican platforms and need a new party. Well, maybe not just one because if they can't find fit in these two patterns, why would they in a single third one? If you are completely a Democrat, except you're a good Catholic and oppose abortion in any form or circumstance, would you be happy in a party which included a complete Republican who didn't believe everyone should have a gun if they want? If the party reflected these views wouldn't it be amorphously centrist with a bland rhetoric endorsing everything? Isn't this exactly where the problem with the 2 platforms rests? Isn't your preference for an alternative simply a symptom of the problems with the "inclusive" approach found in either party?

[gr8fuldaniel]

Quote by: Osborn I hope this clarifies my position in your eyes,

Your position is clear in my eyes. But your position is flawed in one very important way. You are pretending that all the same things would happen with Dems at the helm, so you feel secure about voting for the Garden of Eden party. Even after the polling showed there was absolute ZERO chance of them winning. So in effect you voted for GW Bush. You voted for more pre-emptive, perpetual war. You voted against the people of New Orleans. You voted for a fascist/bigotted supreme court justice. More cronyism, Less education. More expensive healthcare, less taxes for the mega wealthy. More bullets and less books. You voted against veterans benefits and against the right to petition government for a redress of grievances. You voted for this retard who shuns oversight:

Link Bush shuns Patriot Act Requirement In addendum to law, he says oversight rules are not binding By Charlie Savage, Globe Staff | March 24, 2006 WASHINGTON -- When President Bush signed the reauthorization of the USA Patriot Act this month, he included an addendum saying that he did not feel obliged to obey requirements that he inform Congress about how the FBI was using the act's expanded police powers.

By default, you elected the guy who said "The Constitution is just a goddamn piece of paper" I never heard any dems ever say that. But you voted for the guy who did. I dont see any Dems signed on the the PNAC, so Iraq would have most likely never happened. At least not until Saddam attacked us. By not voting for the only one who could replace the ugly incumbant, you voted for fascism. I admit there are flawed dems. There are flawed Libertarians, and the party itself cannot explain how the country will work without city sewar system and roads and cops and firemen. How will Libertarians quell the anarchy that will come within 3 days of the oath of office. I am sure a gun totin redneck would enjoy the idea. Not appreciated by anyone else though.

Quote by: bishop i'd be interested in seeing the good members of both parties (those who have shown that their allegiance lies with the public) break off and form their own third party..

and a fourth and a 5th and 6th party. Hell, why not 20 parties to run against the only imperialist party that we need to defeat? The more the merrier, right?

[bishop]

i'd like to just start out with one, maybe two...

20 parties is way too splintered - and those parties wouldn't stand a chance in hell of winning.. 20 parties could be fine if we operated under a parlimentary system where there was no winner-take-all rule... unfortunately, that isn't the case.. excessive numbers of parties works in the establishment's favor.

[Milton Bradley]

Quote by: gr8fuldaniel Your position is clear in my eyes. But your position is flawed in one very important way. You are pretending that all the same things would happen with Dems at the helm, so you feel secure about voting for the Garden of Eden party. Even after the polling showed there was absolute ZERO chance of them winning.

Only if people such as yourself, who actually vote for evil, refuse to see the error of their ways, and make amends the proper way, through correcting their actions. Time to turn that critical lense on whoever is influencing your opion.

Quote by: gr8fuldaniel So in effect you voted for GW Bush. You voted for more pre-emptive, perpetual war. You voted against the people of New Orleans. You voted for a fascist/bigotted supreme court justice. More cronyism, Less education. More expensive healthcare, less taxes for the mega wealthy. More bullets and less books. You voted against veterans benefits and against the right to petition government for a redress of grievances. You voted for this retard who shuns oversight: By default, you elected the guy who said "The Constitution is just a goddamn piece of paper" I never heard any dems ever say that. But you voted for the guy who did. I dont see any Dems signed on the the PNAC, so Iraq would have most likely never happened. At least not until Saddam attacked us. By not voting for the only one who could replace the ugly incumbant, you voted for fascism. I admit there are flawed dems. There are flawed Libertarians, and the party itself cannot explain how the country will work without city sewar system and roads and cops and firemen. How will Libertarians quell the anarchy that will come within 3 days of the oath of office. I am sure a gun totin redneck would enjoy the idea. Not appreciated by anyone else though. and a fourth and a 5th and 6th party. Hell, why not 20 parties to run against the only imperialist party that we need to defeat? The more the merrier, right?

It's nice of you to attempt to dump everybody elses garbage on my lawn, but I presume even you know better than to believe that to be true. You are not really that clueless, are you buddy?


If that is all my fault, you truly need to do something about it, because I can honestly say I have no intention of reform, if reform is to be viewed through your eyes. Send the hit squad, cause I'm outta control.


I had no idea that I was the problem all along. Go figure.

[gr8fuldaniel]

Bishop,
I admit I was being sarcastic. I agree with you on the voting system. If we had Instant Runoff Voting, THEN (and only then), could I see voting for a 3rd or 4th candidate. Because then people could vote in order of preference. This is the only way a third party could ever be installed.
If the choices are A) Evil, B) Less evil and C) No chance of winning.....I will vote for less evil every damn time.

We have an old thread on the Australian Election System

And Jesse Jackson Jr has introduced a bill for both The Constitutional Right to Vote and for IRV.


Read the rest of this PDF.

Unfortunately, nobody else thought (Jacksons 2 Bills a and b) was such a great idea. Including those who bragged about it in the left border.

[gr8fuldaniel]

Quote by: Milton It's nice of you to attempt to dump everybody elses garbage on my lawn, but I presume even you know better than to believe that to be true. You are not really that clueless, are you buddy? If that is all my fault, you truly need to do something about it, because I can honestly say I have no intention of reform, if reform is to be viewed through your eyes. Send the hit squad, cause I'm outta control. I had no idea that I was the problem all along. Go figure.

I cant blame you for a crime just because you did nothing to stop it. All you had to do was vote for a viable candidate. You could have helped to put a better man in charge. Those who didnt vote at all are just as guilty by ommission.

We all know how absolutely evil the bush admin is. Why wouldnt you do anything in your power to remove them? Why vote for a non-entity? You secretly like them, dont you? Sometimes we have to swallow our pride and do something against our own will, to benefit humanity. You did nothing to stop these daily murders. That are done for you.

[bishop]

Quote by: dan Unfortunately, nobody else thought (Jacksons 2 Bills a and b) was such a great idea. Including those who bragged about it in the left border.

unless i read them incorrectly (which isn't too hard thanks to the government's horrible websites), it doesn't look like jackson's bills ever made it out of committee... these committees are, as you know, run by republicans. i would happen to think that the politicians quoted in the large picture you posted would've said something had the bill passed committee..

(of course, all this is based on the assumption that it never made it out of the committee.)

[gr8fuldaniel]

Thanx bishop, I figured it was something like that.

A bit off topic, but I thought about you when I read this story last night about a judge who wouldnt accept a court fee of $2 in Federal Reserve notes from a banker. Because there is no money behind it. Its "created out of thin air". So they kill the justice. Rather than dig up 8 quarters. :eek:
Its a wild story.
But again, it is off topic

[Milton Bradley]

Quote by: gr8fuldaniel I admit I was being sarcastic. I agree with you on the voting system. If we had Instant Runoff Voting, THEN (and only then), could I see voting for a 3rd or 4th candidate. Because then people could vote in order of preference. This is the only way a third party could ever be installed. If the choices are A) Evil, B) Less evil and C) No chance of winning.....I will vote for less evil every damn time.

First off, I agreee with IRV, and wish it could be adopted, but...


We need to ask ourselves who is able to lock us out right from the debating stage of the election process.


This does a pretty good job of exposing some of the players beyond the usual Democrats, and Republicans. ( I hope you people are boycotting Anheuser Bush producst as well.)
http://www.pbs.org/now/politics/debates.html


I know the truth hurts Dan, but the Dems, as a group are as complicit as any other player in this game of defrauding of the American people.


Your philosophy plays right into their hands, and they know it. I would hate to be forced to use the term sheeple in this example, but I'm having a problem coming up with a substitute.

[Osborn F Enready]

Gr8fulDaniel said: We all know how absolutely evil the bush admin is. Why wouldnt you do anything in your power to remove them? Why vote for a non-entity? You secretly like them, dont you? Sometimes we have to swallow our pride and do something against our own will, to benefit humanity. You did nothing to stop these daily murders.

I say:
Daniel, if the rest of the people are too STUPID or too IGNORANT to free themselves, they need to learn the hard cold lessons of the error of their ways, by letting nature take its course. Nature and logic are one and the same. The people that have voted for progressive reform while breaking constitutional laws, have brought on the equal and opposite counters by the alternating majority when they come to power in the two party system. The two party system has isolated itself over time through appointment powers at all levels, through financing, media and corporate manipulation.
Also over time the two major parties have veered toward the fundamentalist extremes in arguments, but the inner moderates come election time. They hold true in principal only to the people who provide the speical intrest financing of the lifestyles the corruption has manifested.

Even now, the only bodies of substance are those that can raise the most money, which is the extreme left MoveOn.org (almost entirely socialist) vs WhiteHouse.INC (almost entirely corporatist) and they do it through media manipulation, internet campaigns, and overall control of the majority of the money involved in all processes of the election system. They organize huge mailing campaigns, fund-raisers that are focused on specific issues, while funds are distributed toward core goals.

I am writing a piece right now about my views of this problem, and the many levels of complexity and tentacle like extensions into the fabric of society. If you want, when I am finished I will post it for everyone to see and we can debate it.

This problem spans many levels from economic to social class, education to perception, instinct to conditioning.

The biggest problem in our modern society is a clash over humanitarian issues, over economic policy. The process has been clouded in contradictory laws, hypocrisy, and a split between rational and irrational logic, due to mis-education of historical lessons and the causes of the events that brought on such tragedy, sacrifice and hopelessness.

There is a connection between them, but it must be a balanced issue, as in the economics must SUPPORT the humanitarian issues for it to be workable through compromise. When humanitarian issues overburden economic support, both sides fail and the system is deemed a failure.

There are connections in history that tie these things together, but they have been distorted over time by those with money, and inlfuence, and as time passes and these people have more power, money and influence, they outweigh all other due to sheer ability of conditioning through control of information.

You are in a small box, that is inside many other boxes. To understand, you must jump outside all of the boxes, and really look at what forces are at work to understand what are actions, and what are reactions.

[gr8fuldaniel]

Pending Legislation for IRV

Quote by: Milton We need to ask ourselves who is able to lock us out right from the debating stage of the election process

I believe only those polled with less than 5% support are "locked out" of the debates. That doesnt seem all that oppressive, IMHO

I know the truth hurts Dan, but the Dems, as a group are as complicit as any other player in this game of defrauding of the American people. Your philosophy plays right into their hands, and they know it. I would hate to be forced to use the term sheeple in this example, but I'm having a problem coming up with a substitute.

The truth doesnt hurt me. I didnt really think Kerry was the best we could do. But he was better than bush and Badnarik

[bishop]

i think the libertarians' posts here are more or less, acts of venting frustration.. it does have to be frustrating to really believe in a party's message, while the vast majority of the public (extending far beyond the corporate media) doesn't have much respect for the LP... people've been lashing out at the two party system for quite some time and there haven't been any noteworthy accomplishments. yeah, maybe they'd get 2% in the polls as opposed to 0.5% if they were allowed into the debates, but i do not believe that scapegoating the media or the presidential debate regulations would result in any significant improvement... alan keyes preached the constitution in 2000, quite elegantly at that - and he did horribly in the republican primaries..

i don't think there is any anti-bush person here who would even suggest that the dems are a bunch of saints.. (i'm hesitant to say the same for the bushbots - although some feign true criticism.) the issue isn't that people are "too stupid" or "too ignorant".. the real issue is that they don't see anything/anyone else worth voting for..

myself, i like a lot of what i hear from the LP... i also like some of what the greens say.. i like some of what the dems/republicans say... etc... and everytime i walk into the voting booth, i'm left with the realization that all of them are shitty choices, so i have to vote for the least worst of the bunch.. maybe if i was motivated enough (and had the free time), i could take on the herculian task of starting up yet another third party - but i don't, and i'm not going to try... i just have to resign myself to the sad fact that next election i'm going to have to vote from yet another horrible slate of horrible candidates.

i'm cringing now thinking about choosing between brownback, clinton and badnarik (and whatever nut the greens decide to appoint)..

(here's one for the conspiracy theorists - why do all of our options suck so horribly?)

[Milton Bradley]

Quote by: bishop i'm cringing now thinking about choosing between brownback, clinton and badnarik (and whatever nut the greens decide to appoint).. (here's one for the conspiracy theorists - why do all of our options suck so horribly?)

I don't think all those candidates sucked. I think peoples perception of the fundamental truths on which this society was built have been lost, as has been peoples knowledge that to solve the problems we noww face, we must return to the fundamental principles.


Just like sports, it's all about the fundamentals.

[Scribbler1]

Quote by: Milton Bradley Just like sports, it's all about the fundamentals.

And also just like sports, America loves a winner, actually it should be "America loves a PROVEN winner". That's probably why the Women's Pro Basketball League died after 3 seasons and I feel that is a major reason third parties don't succeed. No history.

[bishop]

Quote by: Milton Bradley I don't think all those candidates sucked. I think peoples perception of the fundamental truths on which this society was built have been lost, as has been peoples knowledge that to solve the problems we noww face, we must return to the fundamental principles. Just like sports, it's all about the fundamentals.

that would be a persuasive argument to someone who shares your perspective, but i'm more concerned with the details rather than philosophical ideals.. i want to see solid plans about how a leader intends on solving the multitude of massive problems our country faces.. this fluff about the constitution and principles is nice and all, but it lacks real substance as far as i'm concerned. pathetic economic arguments about returning to the gold standard, endless ramblings about the right to bear arms, complaints about taxes, etc...

[Scribbler1]

The problem is the Democrats and th Republicans aren't big on details either. They either don't tell you what they plan to do or if they do it's often a load of lies. Both of those parties are nothing more than cults of personality.

[Sonart]

.

Quote by: bishop i'd like to just start out with one, maybe two... 20 parties is way too splintered - and those parties wouldn't stand a chance in hell of winning..

Too late... the U.S. already has over twice that many political parties. And no, they don't stand a chance in hell of winning anything. :)

Quote by: bishop this fluff about the constitution and principles is nice and all, but it lacks real substance as far as i'm concerned. pathetic economic arguments about returning to the gold standard, endless ramblings about the right to bear arms, complaints about taxes, etc...

Specifically, it lacks a power base with which to move ideas into any form of legislative action.


.

[rmnunez]

On party proliferation I remember there were at one time 352 separate political parties in Andalusia vying for posts in the first elections after Franco (they quickly consolidated), but still now there are at least 5 'major' parties of importance in all regions, plus a number of medium-sized regional ones.

[Milton Bradley]

Quote by: gr8fuldaniel I cant blame you for a crime just because you did nothing to stop it. All you had to do was vote for a viable candidate. You could have helped to put a better man in charge. Those who didnt vote at all are just as guilty by ommission.

So all I had to do to rectify the situation was compromise my morals, and vote for evil men to rule us. Granted, it is the lesser evil, but widely recognized as evil, the very thing I want out of my life, and my governmennt.

Quote by: gr8fuldaniel We all know how absolutely evil the bush admin is. Why wouldnt you do anything in your power to remove them? Why vote for a non-entity? You secretly like them, dont you? Sometimes we have to swallow our pride and do something against our own will, to benefit humanity. You did nothing to stop these daily murders. That are done for you.

Again, you beat the same dead horse because you refuse to see the point I make about us knowing how evil the Democrats are as well.


Two election cycles ago, I was having similar converations with Republicans ( with whom I partially agreed, like yourself ) about the flip side of this predicament. They said I should vote for the "lesser evil" to get those prevent thos Democrats from gaining office. ( Again, I partially agreed ) So here the cycle repeats itself again, the extremes try to sway the middle outward to prevent the other extreme from taking the country down the wrong road, rinse, and repeat. I would think you would be able to spot this obvious flaw iin your own logic.


You, the constituents whos votes actually elect these people are the ones who have to compromise, simply because you will never be able to sway us around to being complicit in their crimes. The good guys need your vote, and your voice. ( Which, incidently, is currently advocating evil )


You see, some of us are actually still innocent, and not eager to join in on the group trampling of the constitution. Call it the moral high ground, or whatever you will, but know that I have no blame in any of this, and I doubt you will be able to say the same. This is why I appeal to you, because I care.


That way I see it, you are saying Hitler is to extreme, and we should all vote Mussolini. I see this concept as little more than advocating Mussolini. That cycle of illogocal behavior has to stop somewhere.


To do the same thing over, and over, the same way, and expect a different result is a classic definition of insanity.

[Milton Bradley]

Quote by: bishop that would be a persuasive argument to someone who shares your perspective, but i'm more concerned with the details rather than philosophical ideals.. i want to see solid plans about how a leader intends on solving the multitude of massive problems our country faces.. this fluff about the constitution and principles is nice and all, but it lacks real substance as far as i'm concerned. pathetic economic arguments about returning to the gold standard, endless ramblings about the right to bear arms, complaints about taxes, etc...

That is way to simple of a picture to paint.


I can't believe that person who reads the same stories here that I do can actually attempt to reduce this down to such a simple shit flinging contest. You know as well as I do that this is many, very complex issues, but fundamentally it's about how the Democrats, and Republicans all agree to spend our money, and stack our courts with judicial activists who legislate from the bench. Corporate welfare, farm subsidies, the Executive power grab, locking out Third party opposition, etc,etc, etc...


I don't have to start preaching to the choir here, do I?