Volconvo is a debate forum for the discussion of political, religious, and news-based topics.

Osborn F Enready · May 27, 2005, 05:16 am

Dotcoma said:
Osborn, must you turn every topic into your cause? Discuss what is in my post or do not post in it please.

I say:
I was speaking directly on point. You specifically refer to the democrats as being the "minority" party in this case. That is accepted by many, but to me absolutely laughable.

We have two major parties, and at least 5 nationally followed (other) parties. Two parties are behemoths, that occupy nearly all seats in both House and Senate while some of the other parties have meager representation if any at all. The media doesn't even recognize a third party that has national acceptance at the ballot! (Last election the Libertarian Party was on the ballot in all 50 states.) Instead, they focus on Nader the Independent who can't even make the ballot in an overwhelming majority of states. (Due to ridiculous restrictions in some states, since they all differ and hamper all but mega-parties from easily attaining access.)

How either of these "mega-parties" could be deemed a minority when speaking of political parties, is to me a joke.

Hence the reason I posted at all. You want to see a fillibuster by a true minority party, let's see the Libertarian Party Representatives fillibuster all that is truly an injustice of the Constitution. Since there are only a couple, it would be a little taxing compared to the "majority" of seats held by the two mega-parties.

I apologize if my injection of opinion and facts hurts your debate, but I felt I should explain the point of my first post which you seemed so upset about.

Milton Bradley · May 27, 2005, 05:38 am

Quote:

Quote by: OberonDOthersied

The beauty of the constitution is how it changes according to the times, Osborn. It was written that way for a reason.

Quote:

Quote by: The Analog Kid

How does the Constitution change with the times?

You can't be of the "living breathing" mindset, can you?

I'm betting he only feels that way when the when the Republicans are running the show.

lsbskins1 · May 27, 2005, 09:37 am

Quote:

Quote by: The Analog Kid

Sorry to inform you but the Republican party is not my party. I vote based on who the person is and their philosophy, not what party they belong too.
Too many people, including most members here have this Democrats Good/Republicans Bad mentality. That is far more damaging than any silly rule change in the Senate.

I really dislike it when people use this rationalization. So, what Democratic office holder (Senator, President, Govenor, Congressman) have you voted for in the past? And just to be clear, Zell Miller does not count, nor does any old timer who started out as a dixicrat and then shifted to the Republican party. Lets get real here. The reason that there are different parties is because of the fact that different people have different philosophies and the parties sprang up around those philosophical differences (Hamilton v. Jefferson). Rhetorical fluff, saying you vote for "the man" and not "the party". Your posts demonstate your philosophy and your philosophy is essentially the same as the Republican philosophy, so lets stop parsing phrases and nit picking definitions. You, I and just about everyone else who can read know what the essential point is here.

I do not believe that Republicans are in and of themselves "bad". I believe the policies they advocate are misinformed at best and dangerous at worst. Unlike most Conservative people, or at least most of the really noisy ones, I don't believe my opposite numbers hate America. I believe that most of them love their country the best way they know how. But I do believe they are wrong. As I believe you are wrong about the filibuster issue.

The Analog Kid · May 27, 2005, 03:08 pm

You are entitled to your opinion here. I've been very open in that I've expressed that I agree with Republicans more than I do Democrats but Im sorry, they just do not automatically have my vote. I've voted libertarian and independent on many occaisions. The Republican party is not the same Republican party that I respected at one time.
They are not for smaller government any longer. That is just one example of many.
I could list you many more principles in which I don't tow the Republican line.

You shouldn't lock yourself into such a narrow mindset of Democrats good/ Republicans bad.
Neither party has a lock on whats right or what is the truth.

lsbskins1 · May 27, 2005, 03:37 pm

"You shouldn't lock yourself into such a narrow mindset of Democrats good/ Republicans bad.
Neither party has a lock on whats right or what is the truth."

It's more like "Over-all philosophy of Democrats good. Over-all philosophy of Republicans bad." Where I do not agree with Democrats, I think Republican solutions worse. And lets also be serious, the are no viable alternatives. How many other party Senators do we have who were elected running on a third party ticket. If you want to effect a change in the institutions, you have to be in them.

View Poll Results: A Senate Filibuster is:
A reasonable tool for a minority party	14	58.33%
Impedance on democracy	10	41.67%
Voters: 24. You may not vote

May 27, 2005, 05:16 am	#41 (permalink) (top)
Osborn F Enready Principled Observer Location: Toledo, Ohio Posts: 13,873	Dotcoma said: Osborn, must you turn every topic into your cause? Discuss what is in my post or do not post in it please. I say: I was speaking directly on point. You specifically refer to the democrats as being the "minority" party in this case. That is accepted by many, but to me absolutely laughable. We have two major parties, and at least 5 nationally followed (other) parties. Two parties are behemoths, that occupy nearly all seats in both House and Senate while some of the other parties have meager representation if any at all. The media doesn't even recognize a third party that has national acceptance at the ballot! (Last election the Libertarian Party was on the ballot in all 50 states.) Instead, they focus on Nader the Independent who can't even make the ballot in an overwhelming majority of states. (Due to ridiculous restrictions in some states, since they all differ and hamper all but mega-parties from easily attaining access.) How either of these "mega-parties" could be deemed a minority when speaking of political parties, is to me a joke. Hence the reason I posted at all. You want to see a fillibuster by a true minority party, let's see the Libertarian Party Representatives fillibuster all that is truly an injustice of the Constitution. Since there are only a couple, it would be a little taxing compared to the "majority" of seats held by the two mega-parties. I apologize if my injection of opinion and facts hurts your debate, but I felt I should explain the point of my first post which you seemed so upset about. Petition of Redress of Grievances: http://www.givemeliberty.org/default.htm Canadian Lawsuit Against Their National Banks: http://www.freewebs.com/classaction/ Osborn F. Enready

May 27, 2005, 03:08 pm	#44 (permalink) (top)
The Analog Kid Igneous Magma Posts: 216	You are entitled to your opinion here. I've been very open in that I've expressed that I agree with Republicans more than I do Democrats but Im sorry, they just do not automatically have my vote. I've voted libertarian and independent on many occaisions. The Republican party is not the same Republican party that I respected at one time. They are not for smaller government any longer. That is just one example of many. I could list you many more principles in which I don't tow the Republican line. You shouldn't lock yourself into such a narrow mindset of Democrats good/ Republicans bad. Neither party has a lock on whats right or what is the truth.

May 27, 2005, 03:37 pm	#45 (permalink) (top)
lsbskins1 Redskins Rule Location: South-Western Virginia Posts: 2,462	"You shouldn't lock yourself into such a narrow mindset of Democrats good/ Republicans bad. Neither party has a lock on whats right or what is the truth." It's more like "Over-all philosophy of Democrats good. Over-all philosophy of Republicans bad." Where I do not agree with Democrats, I think Republican solutions worse. And lets also be serious, the are no viable alternatives. How many other party Senators do we have who were elected running on a third party ticket. If you want to effect a change in the institutions, you have to be in them.