|
|
|
Snake
SFN Addict
USA
2511 Posts |
 Posted - 11/10/2003 : 15:55:59 [Permalink]
|
quote:
Originally posted by filthy
I've been hearing and reading mutterings about reactivating the Slective Service. I think that if it happens, it won't be until after the '04 elections. Anyone else hearing anything about that?
Filthy! You didn't call up a talk radio show this morning saying that did you?
Wow! If not you someone with the identical thought. They even mentioned they signed up to work at the draft board, there's a web site....I guess for the gov. asking to hire people he said. |
 |
|
|
gezzam
SFN Regular
Australia
751 Posts |
Posted - 11/10/2003 : 21:51:44 [Permalink]
|
Here's something on it...
http://seattlepi.nwsource.com/national/147483_draft08.html
Gezza |
Mistakes are a part of being human. Appreciate your mistakes for what they are: precious life lessons that can only be learned the hard way. Unless it's a fatal mistake, which, at least, others can learn from.
Al Franken |
|
|
|
Gorgo
SFN Die Hard
USA
5310 Posts |
|
|
Renae
SFN Regular
543 Posts |
Posted - 11/11/2003 : 06:29:18 [Permalink]
|
Gorgo, that chart doesn't ring true at all. It puts Edwards right next to Bush, which makes no logical sense.
What it means to be a Democrat or a Republican has evolved over the years. JFK and LBJ were hawks compared to the Democrats today. JFK even pushed tax cuts. And wasn't Abraham Lincoln a Republican?
Clinton was a moderate. Most of the Democrats today are moderates--most, however, aren't anywhere near the neo-cons on most issues. Thankfully.  |
|
|
|
Gorgo
SFN Die Hard
USA
5310 Posts |
Posted - 11/11/2003 : 07:07:09 [Permalink]
|
Except for social issues, they're all the same. JFK led terrorism against Cuba and started the U.S. attack on South Vietnam. Clinton was a criminal, attacking countries almost at will, killing hundreds of thousands, if not millions of Iraqis. Clinton got NAFTA through with no debate, for which any Republican would have been hung.
Some of these people are a little lighter on social policy than Republicans, but Clinton oversaw the imprisonment of a large percentage of our population. All of them would be acting the same after 9/11, grabbing power where they can. I'm probably foolish to think that Kucinich will attempt to do more, but he seems sincere and took a big risk by trying to stand against the big money in Cleveland when he was mayor, so maybe he might do something if elected. If not, or if he's not elected, then I'm probably stupid if I don't head for Norway at that point. |
I know the rent is in arrears
The dog has not been fed in years
It's even worse than it appears
But it's alright-
Jerry Garcia
Robert Hunter
|
|
|
|
Valiant Dancer
Forum Goalie
USA
4826 Posts |
Posted - 11/11/2003 : 07:14:03 [Permalink]
|
quote:
Originally posted by Snake
quote:
Originally posted by Valiant Dancer
I can't fault people for doing their Constitutional duty of voting their conscience.
Give me a break. I worked at the polls in this last California election. Some people are idiots. That coupled with the demographics of Florida, I think much of the falut was on the voters then.
Not reading the entire message again, Snake?
You convieniently left out "The only really questionable parts about the election was Florida. Disenfranchised voters, people not paying attention to the butterfly ballot, voting machines that had not been maintained per the manufacturers express written instructions all had lasting and profound effects on the 2000 Presidential election."
It still does not place the blame of Bush's election on the heads of people who voted for Nader. A politician has to earn their votes, they do not "belong" to one candidate and then another candidate "steals" them. I do not fault people for voting their conscience. Evidentally you do because 54 failed. |
Cthulhu/Asmodeus when you're tired of voting for the lesser of two evils
Brother Cutlass of Reasoned Discussion |
|
|
|
Renae
SFN Regular
543 Posts |
Posted - 11/11/2003 : 07:21:01 [Permalink]
|
I'm just not gonna let the "they're all the same" line stand any more. It's factually and logically wrong, and I'm tired of reading it here and elsewhere.
Bush supports tax cuts for the wealthy; most Democrats don't. Bush supported repealing mandatory overtime; most Democrats don't. Republicans overturned ergonomic workplace laws here in Washington State. How many Democrats supported that? And don't even get me started on the initiative anti-tax crap that's being sold as "populist" here in Washington--it's actually Republicanism in disgusise. Bush supports coddling corporations who spoil the environment; most Democrats don't. Bush has never known a poor or middle-class day in his life. Clinton has; so has Edwards.
I can go on and on about the differences between the parties but frankly I'm boring myself. It's not useful to compare the U.S. political system to countries with radical parties. The U.S. is, by and large, a moderate country. Too moderate for me as a leftist, but hey. That's who we are. And I'm not sure it's always a bad thing.
|
|
|
|
Gorgo
SFN Die Hard
USA
5310 Posts |
Posted - 11/11/2003 : 07:37:32 [Permalink]
|
| Okay, find some small thing that you think is different and say hey, they're different. Yes, they're all different, and yes, Republicans are a little worse with social policy, and Democrats talk more about social policy, but at the end of the day, wages went down for the past twenty years, black males went to prison, and people in "developing" countries are dying due to "Western" intervention. They're all the same. What we need is someone who is going to change something. |
I know the rent is in arrears
The dog has not been fed in years
It's even worse than it appears
But it's alright-
Jerry Garcia
Robert Hunter
|
|
|
|
Renae
SFN Regular
543 Posts |
Posted - 11/11/2003 : 07:55:56 [Permalink]
|
Jeez, it must be a dark and cold world you live in, Gorgo.
These aren't small differences; they're significant. If you don't see them, then you're not paying enough attention.
I can site statistics about how things HAVE changed in the last 20 years, including gains for minorities, women, and gays. Including things that have changed for the worse (real wages, etc.) That isn't the point.
We have politicans that will 'change something.' But they can only change what the American middle or majority will allow. That's how a democracy (for you sticklers, OK, a republic) works. Frankly, I'd hate it if the radical right wing was 'changing something.' Oh, wait...they already are.  |
|
|
|
Gorgo
SFN Die Hard
USA
5310 Posts |
Posted - 11/11/2003 : 08:13:37 [Permalink]
|
That's my point, they still have to at least acknowledge the pretense of a democracy, and if we decide to change something and that doesn't change, then we at least know that it's not a democracy. Witness the Iraq war, the people of the world and the U.S. did not want it, but it continues, and now we're arguing about how best to continue it rather than calling these criminals to be responsible for their crimes. That of course includes criminals like Ford, Carter, Reagan, Bush I, Clinton, and Bush II.
Don't expect things to change by electing more of the same. Gains for minorities, etc. have happened because the people have decided to change things, not because politicians have taken the initiative. However, if you look at who's in prison, and who's children still live in poverty, you'll see that we have a long way to go. |
I know the rent is in arrears
The dog has not been fed in years
It's even worse than it appears
But it's alright-
Jerry Garcia
Robert Hunter
|
|
|
|
Snake
SFN Addict
USA
2511 Posts |
Posted - 11/11/2003 : 16:30:12 [Permalink]
|
quote:
Originally posted by Valiant Dancer
quote:
Originally posted by Snake
quote:
Originally posted by Valiant Dancer
I can't fault people for doing their Constitutional duty of voting their conscience.
Give me a break. I worked at the polls in this last California election. Some people are idiots. That coupled with the demographics of Florida, I think much of the falut was on the voters then.
Not reading the entire message again, Snake?
You convieniently left out "The only really questionable parts about the election was Florida.
You have a nasty attitude. You can't assume I didn't read, whatever. I don't care to talk to you.
My opinion is that many voters don't pay attention to what they are doing, had they checked their ballot to confirm their vote they wouldn't be complaining afterwards. People always want to blame someone else. I don't answer all parts of posts, I was only commenting on that one bit of it. If you think I didn't address what you meant, you shouldn't be so sarcastic, I have not said anything to you in that way, that I can remember. But I now I will, you Talk Too Much.
|
|
|
|
Valiant Dancer
Forum Goalie
USA
4826 Posts |
Posted - 11/12/2003 : 07:57:09 [Permalink]
|
quote:
Originally posted by Snake
quote:
Originally posted by Valiant Dancer
quote:
Originally posted by Snake
quote:
Originally posted by Valiant Dancer
I can't fault people for doing their Constitutional duty of voting their conscience.
Give me a break. I worked at the polls in this last California election. Some people are idiots. That coupled with the demographics of Florida, I think much of the falut was on the voters then.
Not reading the entire message again, Snake?
You convieniently left out "The only really questionable parts about the election was Florida.
You have a nasty attitude. You can't assume I didn't read, whatever. I don't care to talk to you.
My opinion is that many voters don't pay attention to what they are doing, had they checked their ballot to confirm their vote they wouldn't be complaining afterwards. People always want to blame someone else. I don't answer all parts of posts, I was only commenting on that one bit of it. If you think I didn't address what you meant, you shouldn't be so sarcastic, I have not said anything to you in that way, that I can remember. But I now I will, you Talk Too Much.
When you comment on something directly addressed in my post, then you give the impression that you do not read the entire post. This is endemic to you, Snake. You ignored part of the post in this one and completely ignored evidence that refuted your position in the Prop 54 thread as well.
|
Cthulhu/Asmodeus when you're tired of voting for the lesser of two evils
Brother Cutlass of Reasoned Discussion |
|
|
|
Computer Org
Skeptic Friend
392 Posts |
Posted - 11/13/2003 : 08:18:54 [Permalink]
|
quote:
Originally posted by Gorgo
The sanctions were just as criminal as this part of the war and no Bush would have got NAFTA through. Wages have gone down for twenty years. No. We need to change the system, not recycle the same old crap with different slogans. (Emphasis added.)
You are wrong, wrong, wrong on this point, Gorgo. We do not need to "change the system" --- we need to use the system defined in the Constitution (as slightly modified by Amendment 12.
The problem is that under the Constitution we are NOT supposed to be voting for anyone to be President; we are supposed to be selecting Electors who are supposed to vote for who is to be President (and, in a separate ballot, for Vice-President).
Everyone who votes for a "candidate" for either President or Vice-President is, in my opinion, guilty of Electoral Corruption worse than anything I've ever read about anywhere else in the World.quote:
Originally posted by Gorgo
If Republicans like Kerry are too far left, then the U.S. deserves extreme right wing criminals like Bush and Clinton.
"...extreme right wing criminals..."??? How about "...extreme right wing war criminals..."? There is a BIG difference between an ordinary mass-murdering criminal and a mass-murdering War Criminal. "War Criminals" such as Hitler, H. Mueller, and Goebbels are an especially henious class of criminal before international law and their ordering the mass slaughters outside the law was treated most harshly by none other than US, the United States of America.
(Gorgo: I could put ditto marks next to all of your posts and not bother posting anything myself. What a great bunch of posts!  )
gezzam: Political parties are NOT a part of the lawful, Constitutional system in the U.S. In fact, after 8 years in office, the first President, General G. Washington decried political parties/factions in his farewell speach and strongly warned against them as potential threats to the Union. While we have two (main) parties, as Gorgo most correctly (but implicitly) pointed out they are about the same. IMO, they BOTH are just farcical splits of a single political party (for purpose of maintaining power): The Federalist Party dating back to the odious second president, Adams. The way they keep any other 'parties' from getting a finger-tip hold on political power (such as the Greens is through the hideously subversive "winner take all" rule. Under this rule the electors of the losing party in a state MUST vote for the candidate they theoretically despise. Then they got around this problem by just twisting the Constitution, the Law, into a legal pretzel and "selected" ALL the electors to represent a majority+ of the people. It's all an ugly, ugly episode in the history of political subversions.
And Kil: "...trash the Constitution..."? Bah! IMO the Constitution was thoroughly trashed as long ago as 1870-1880. From then on any further trashing was just "icky icing on the political-garbage cake".  (Sorry: That well-pissed angry frownie was aimed at our "Government of Subversives, for Subversives, and by Subversives" and not at you.  ) |
Do thou amend thy face, and I'll amend my life. --Falstaff |
|
|
|
Gorgo
SFN Die Hard
USA
5310 Posts |
Posted - 11/13/2003 : 10:30:35 [Permalink]
|
Thanks, CO, I so rarely find any agreement here that I should probably just say no more than thanks.
I guess if just adhering to the Constitution fixes the problem, I really don't have a problem with that. However, I think we need to have an international discussion regarding what democracy is and how it should work. I say democracy, for lack of a better word. The purpose of democracy is to attain what is best for all involved. How do we do that. My guess is, when all is said and done, the end result will not be a capitalist oligarchy. Now, if we can do that in the U.S. with reforms, or getting back to the Constitution, then I'm all for it. I know we don't get it by attacking Iraq, or Afghanistan or South Vietnam, or Panama, or Yugoslavia, or Cuba..... |
I know the rent is in arrears
The dog has not been fed in years
It's even worse than it appears
But it's alright-
Jerry Garcia
Robert Hunter
|
|
|
|
Computer Org
Skeptic Friend
392 Posts |
Posted - 11/13/2003 : 11:53:20 [Permalink]
|
The sad part is that we have never really given government under Constitution a chance. Genl. Washington spent his time just trying to set things up; next came the Federalist Adams who started remolding things to his tastes --- which were monarchical.
Democracy, huh? Democracy is never mentioned in the Constitution although surely it was discussed. When someone asked Ben Franklin as he left the Hall: "What have you wrought?", he answered:quote:
A Republic, if you can keep it.
One of the biggest explicit duties of the Govt. of the United States is to insure a Republican form of government to each state.
When ancient Athens finally fell to a dictatorial tyrannt, it was a Democracy.
Adalf Hitler siezed power in Germany through the democratic processes then in place.
In my nervous opinion, Democracy is a very dangerous form of government; even a Representative Democracy.
I, following the lead of the Constitution, favor a Republican form of government. What we seem to have now is a Democracy moving rapidly toward a Dictatorship.
I think that if we were to follow the Constitution --- with no lawyers' clever mish-mash for convenience, loot, or power-mongering --- that we would automatically solve almost all of our problems.
My view, anyway. |
Do thou amend thy face, and I'll amend my life. --Falstaff |
|
|
 |
|
|
|
Topic Locked
