Republican, Democrat, liberal, ...

who said the dems weren't compliant in their votes on the war?

but let's ask who's war this is? eh? Shall we?

Did the dems send too few troops?
Did the dems say this would be a slam dunk?
Did the dems say we would be greeted as liberators?
Did the dems say the smoking gun would be a mushroom cloud?
Did the dems pull the inspectors out of Iraq b4 they could finish their job?
Did the dems completely and undeniably botch this war so horribly, that the region may never fully recover from it?

etcetera

etcetera.

 

No the dems didn't do any of these things by themselves, but by voting to give war powers to Bush they were complicent, and even more important, empowering. But you only seem to see the republicans as the enemy. The republicans couldn't have pulled it off without democrat support. Because they did hold a majority doesn't mean they couldn't have ask questions and demanded answers. But they didn't. They took the easy path. They never even ask who left the anthrax.

And yes the democrats in office at the time this war was enacted are responsible for it as much as they allowed permitted the republicans to carry out their agenda without question. Hillary and others have a lot to answer for as well as the republicans.

 

The Dems in office did nothing to ask questions about the Patriot Act I or II or the SPP. Just because they weren't a majority doesn't give them a pass on accountability.

They didn't even credibly try to stop torture at Guantanemo or transferring of prisoners to foreign camps, yet I think they were aware of it.

 

I hold democrats MORE responsible than republicans, they were the only chance for oversight and they FUCKING BLEW IT...........

 

Of course they all have the same agenda anyway............I guess I should be kicking my own ass for being gullible enough to hold one to a higher standard than the other..........two sides, same coin.

 

Should never hold anyone above or below one's own standards. All should be accountable especially those that formulate legislation.

 

I agree with you wholeheartedly gardener, it's just really sad..........i'm very discouraged for my children and their children, I'm disgusted with government and "mainstream" society in general..........the OP is only 14 and she is ABSOLUTELY right.........all the names, the gimmicks, the "issues" all set up just to divide..............then conquer. I'm not old by any means but as I get older, the more I study, the more I research, the more I try to change some minds, open eyes, AFFECT SOME TYPE OF POSITIVE CHANGE.............nothing helps....and it never will because as long as human beings have egos, they will crave power, and money.........the cycle continues. Sad part is we are most assuredly in the minority, everyday people get more apathetic, more materialistic, and pay less and less attention to the FUCKING WALLS CRUMBING DOWN AROUND THEM!

 

You can't really account for anyone but yourself, and if you do that you've done a lot.
You should always continue to ask questions and never blindly follow anyone else. Your life is just that your life.

 

Earthmother

Wonderful piece of rhetoric, I actually laughed out loud at that great piece of oratorical flourish “Well, I'm certain that I can't be any clearer than that” a rhetorical devise often implanted in such speeches – subconsciously or not – when the person knows they haven’t actually made anything clearer.

I mean in political terms what have you said?

I’d asked what polices ‘us’ were to take whether it was to be liberal, democrat, conservative, dictatorial or anarchist in nature? Whether it was going to be capitalist or collectivist, was it to have a market at all, a regulated market or laissez faire free for all? If there was going to be welfare provision? What kind of taxation, if any, it would have? And I also asked about defence and the environment.

None of these things is being covered here and certainly not by you. So nothing is clear except the desire maybe to keep thinks unclear.

**

You said “We SHOULD be asking questions, but not dickerng over details between ourselves, especially when people are being quite clear in their statements”

So reasonably I asked you who decided which question should be asked and which shouldn’t, your reply is that no one decides - then you went off on your rhetorical rant.

But what does no one deciding, mean? Some questions should be asked and some not, so the question still remains what can be asked and what not? (or is that one of the questions that shouldn’t be asked?)


**

The fact is that what kind of government and economy people live under are what really effect real lives.

You can use as many rhetorical clichés as you like

– we are all in the same boat – we are all victims – not seeing the wood for the trees – fear itself - the human race is a beaten down, manipulated, and controlled - words in peoples mouths - I'm certain that I can't be any clearer than that –

to try and cover up the fact you have said absolutely nothing and mean absolutely squat. OR you can actually say in what ways you plan to make the world better and actually work to achieve them.

But that is when people that are more comfortable with rhetoric and the sowing of confusion than they are in been constructive usually bring up some excuse not to actually debate about the issues that really matter.

Which it seems includes you, ducking out of saying what you actually stand for by claiming you are too busy.

I think you are making it crystal clear what questions that you don’t want answering, any question that might mean you actually having to explain anything.

 

Gardener

“I have stated my position on many issues on this board”

So when I ask, you can’t tell, now you claim you have stated your position elsewhere? So I’m sure you can point out where these positions of yours are and link to them?

Again it seems strange – like you are trying to hide something – that you seem so reluctant to just say something?

**

Quote:
Originally Posted by Balbus
“To bring up the Nazi argument seems to prove how desperate you are in your campaign to categorize”

But I’m sure I’m not the only one that has noticed that this statement only sidesteps the issues it doesn’t address them.

“What exactly is your issue Balbus? That I won't declare myself either liberal or conservative? Sorry not going to fallen into that trap.”

Well, to get your views on the issues raised and again it will not have escaped everyone’s notice that you still haven’t replied to those?

Why is that?

I mean your seem to be trying to use an excuse to try and get out of answering.

What have you to hide?

**

 

Brainstew

“I was just saying that I think the reason behind all of the names like conservatice and liceral is to seperate us and the goverment is behind it”

And what I’m asking is why to you think this? What reason do you have for this belief what things to you base it on?

“You were going into other areas, I don't even know what you are talking about”

So don’t you think you should try and find out? That is how people learn by finding something they don’t know or understand and trying to find out about it so that they may come to understanding.

“If you were looking for a political debate them you best go somewhere else because that's not what my post was intended to be”

Why did you come to a political debating forum not looking for a political debate?

**

Dud and others think I’m talking down to you, in fact I’m trying to treat you and your remarks in an adult way, if you don’t want to be treated like an adult then that is fine.

I’ve meet a lot of politically aware young people, here in the forums, at rallies, debates and demonstrations what has characterised them was a willingness to learn.

 

Dud

“I'm disgusted with government and "mainstream" society in general..........the OP is only 14 and she is ABSOLUTELY right.........all the names, the gimmicks, the "issues" all set up just to divide..............then conquer”

Why do you think this? What reason do you have for this belief what things to you base it on?

In what way ‘conquer’?

Are you arguing that all political parties, ideologies, policies are the same? That the Socialists and the free marketers are do the same things in the same way for the same goals?

**

You say you want to “AFFECT SOME TYPE OF POSITIVE CHANGE”, but what does that mean?
What do you want to change things into, I mean if you don’t know, in what way can you claim it will be positive?

You argue that people pay less and less attention to politics, but many of the people that I’ve talked about politics with say the reason for this is that they feel like they’re being deceived, but my problem is that many people here, including you, seem intent on deception.

They seem very reluctant to discuss in any open and honest way, political issues they prefer the very devise that turns people off, deception hidden behind rhetoric.

But as I’ve said for many Americans the very idea of open debate is difficult to grasp they just want people to join them blindly and frown on those that ask questions.

**

You seem to want people to be less materialistic but that means changing the nature of consumer capitalism that is often the spur of materialism and changing the nature of status recognition with society (away from having personal goods giving status toward helping others giving status). How would you do that?

 

This is it, isn’t it?

This stonewalling is all you have?

People wonder why US politics is going down the toilet and I’d have to say this very well could be a contributing factor.

Some people don’t want to be involved in politics they just want to bitch about somebody, something. They are not really thinking about how to bring about a better world only in moaning about how bad everything is and how it should just ‘go’ and they don’t even seem to have a clue on how it should ‘go’ either.

It all about ‘them’ (unspecified) and ‘us’ (everyone that isn’t part of the unspecified them or may even include them) and good people (us) and bad people (them) and when the good people (presumably part of the us) take over good things (unspecifiedly different than the now under them) will happen.

Oh and it is important to understand that asking questions is important as long as the questions are being asked of ‘them’, but good ‘us’ people do not ask questions of ‘us’ and to ask questions of ‘us’ means you must be one of ‘them’.

This is not about bring enlightenment it is about trying to spread ignorance, confusion and apathy.

 

balbus, So, is it out of your system yet? You are obviously "one of them". You know, those annoying people who come on forums to piss people off with their astounding lack of insight. Possibly on purpose. Your manner is undisguised. You wish to stir shit. Your insults are common, not clever. I've seen all this before. A person who has nothing better to do than create distractions. The division spoken of here is embraced by you. Perhaps you are NOT simply someone with questions? Perhaps you are here PURPOSEFULLY to stir the shit. Nobody's buying.

I can be insulting with the best of them if necessary. So, you are from the UK? I don't mean this to sound bigoted but I have found your agenda to be strikingly similar to many others from the UK who I have run into on various forums, not only this one.

Simply disagree with everything, question everything, insult everyone, pick apart the subject until no one can quite remember what the original subject is any more and get everybody arguing. What makes people this way???

We need people in government who at very least have HUMAN emotions and feelings, who actually care for the people they govern. People who are not so all about greed and power, but compassion. It matters not what label they go by.

I was born and raised "democrat". My parents were political activists. I have always suspected that most "republicans" were mentally ill. Now, I see that probably the only presidential candidate worth voting for is a Republican. Has hell now frozen over?
And that assumes that it even makes a difference if you vote or not.

Most likely we will continue to suffer like pampered slaves until things get bad enough that there is a revolt. Some of us are already doing it. Being from the UK, you more than most must be aware that big brother is watching YOU too. Or have you gotten so used to it that it is just ok with you? Do you not have any problem with the way your dictator government is treating you? What are YOU going to do about it? Hang here and insult others?
Bullshit.
Yea, some people ARE too busy to waste time talking to people with their ears closed. I'm taking time to answer you when I should be working on my UNDERGROUND NEWS RAG. I should be working on my SURVIVAL garden. I should be working on important GOODSTOCK issues. These are REAL THINGS with a purpose. And you are here, sidetracking everything JUST LIKE A GOOD POLITICIAN. So, I'll do the same thing to you I would do to any other roadblock. Push it the hell out of the way and go on...



We gather here to discuss the problems we all face. This is prelude to actually doing something about it.

 

Ok. I say all of this because when the goverment has us distracted with silly things like race, labels, social class, and all of that gook they are cheating us over. I bet if I ask 10 random people if children with depression should get meds they'd say yes. There is an organization trying to get people aware of how the drugs that our gov issues our kids for "depression" are related to houlcinageons (I cant spell it) and that's the correlation between all those high school shootings and the kids on psyc meds. I DIDNT USE THAT EXAMPLE BECAUSE THAT'S OFF TOPIC. But that is something that very few people in the USA take note of but they sure as hell can blame the other political party for things that in the end the goverment controls it and no-one wins and they sure as heck can point out every little mistake a political party has made. This is no diff. than the issues with race or gender, stupid, petty things that are ingrated in is from childhood to be importanat and in adulthood cause all types of prejudices.

I was talking about this specificly. I didnt say anything about the other areas you were going off into.

3rd of all this was NOT a debate. I wanted people to discuss their thoughts about the comment I made. I SPECIFICALLY kept things to myself so that it would not be a debate because I wanted people to see the bigger picture, I didnt want this thread to become a battle of political parties. Im trying to be kind but you are making it difficult.

 

**

So, you are from the UK? I don't mean this to sound bigoted but I have found your agenda to be strikingly similar to many others from the UK who I have run into on various forums, not only this one.

Well I have noticed a different approach between Europe and the US. Political debate still exists over here (although under attack from the kind of spin developed in the US) so people have a tendency to be far less accepting as in the US and more confrontational when people seem to be trying to get out of answering questions or trying to get away with deception.

As is clear you seem to believe this kind of investigative enquiry is wrong and bad but why? I mean to me to just accept blindly what people say without trying to find out what they mean is not only silly but dangerous.

**

For example you say -

We need people in government who at very least have HUMAN emotions and feelings, who actually care for the people they govern. People who are not so all about greed and power, but compassion.

But how do you find out who is truly compassionate and who is pretending to be compassionate. Remember the whole ‘compassionate conservatism’ thing? To me is was a cynical ploy to try and win over some moderate voters but many Americans accepted it and large chunks of the US media didn’t seem to question it. So Americans may have voted for the ‘compassionate’ team Bush (who also said he would not rule in a partisan way either).

Do you think questions should have been asked or do you think people were right for just accept that Bush’s team were compassionate conservatives?

**

It matters not what label they go by.
I was born and raised "democrat". My parents were political activists. I have always suspected that most "republicans" were mentally ill. Now, I see that probably the only presidential candidate worth voting for is a Republican. Has hell now frozen over?

You talk of people and candidates and this may possibly be the difference between us I’m not so interested with the individual candidates but the policies they wish to enact.

A person could seem charming and come across as sympathetic and compassionate - especially if I’ve only seen them through the prism of spin and public relations management. But this person might want to bring in policies that I believe are inappropriate, unhelpful or down right dangerous.

If someone wants to be dishonest then they can dress themselves in any disguise but in politics such fronts soon crumble under questioning of the actually policies.

So I get suspicious if someone doesn’t answer questions and refuses to explain what kind of policies they would support.

I begin to wonder if they have ulterior motives and a different agenda than the one they claim.

For example we’ve had right wingers coming here trying to convince people they are unbiased but also telling those that might have left wing leanings that voting, organising or demonstrating for a better world isn’t worth it.


**

And that assumes that it even makes a difference if you vote or not.

Oh dear???

That would have to come next, I’m sure it is just a coincidence.

**

Most likely we will continue to suffer like pampered slaves until things get bad enough that there is a revolt. Some of us are already doing it.

But even a revolt must have policies, you want to tear down the present order fair enough but what do you want to put in its place?

Would you like to read my thread on having a new US constitution.

**

Being from the UK, you more than most must be aware that big brother is watching YOU too. Or have you gotten so used to it that it is just ok with you?

Oh I’ll have a security file, I’ve been visual on the political scene for years.

**

Do you not have any problem with the way your dictator government is treating you? What are YOU going to do about it? Hang here and insult others?

Oh I’m no supporter of the Labour party but I have spent my time at rallies, meetings, demonstrations, gone door to door and hung out on street corners selling my ideals.

Oh and I come here for fun and relaxation.

**

Yea, some people ARE too busy to waste time talking to people with their ears closed.

Sorry it still just seems like a rather poor excuse for not answering questions or explaining what you actually stand for.

**

I'm taking time to answer you when I should be working on my UNDERGROUND NEWS RAG.

Good for you, how many readers do you have?

**

I should be working on my SURVIVAL garden.

I think that’s just what we call an allotment in the UK, I must admit I also like a spot of gardening.

**

I should be working on important GOODSTOCK issues.

I googled it and got some kind of Christian music thingie, is that what you mean? As an atheist I think religion rots the brain but everyone to their own.

**

We gather here to discuss the problems we all face. This is prelude to actually doing something about it.

I agree, but how do you have a discuss if you will not allow questions? I mean shouldn’t we be able to ask what kind of action you want do first?

**

 

Brainstew

“I bet if I ask 10 random people if children with depression should get meds they'd say yes. There is an organization trying to get people aware of how the drugs that our gov issues our kids for "depression" are related to houlcinageons (I cant spell it) and that's the correlation between all those high school shootings and the kids on psyc meds.”

OK, so I asked 10 people here and 9 said no, and wanted to know why the child was depressed, some suggested counselling the only one that said yes went into a long explanation of the differing degrees of depression and mental health issues and said that if all other options had been tried and failed drugs could be used but only after the risks had been explained and only in conjunction with supervision (she was a med student).

Here is the current uk advise -http://www.youngminds.org.uk/depression/YM_NICE_UnderstandingDepression.pdf

And here a comparison between Germany and the US
“Prescription patterns in Germany reveal predominate use of St. John's Wort and TCAs (tricyclic antidepressants), which contrasts sharply with U.S. patterns, wherein SSRIs predominate. Also, in the United States, unlike Germany, 5–9- and 10–14 year olds receive sizable proportions of ATDs.”
http://www.liebertonline.com/doi/abs/10.1089/cap.2006.16.197

**

I don’t think this is a petty matter and I’ve seen a few documentaries on the subject on British television in the past few years so others must think the same, the fact is the information needs to be out there, people need to ask questions and seek answers.

Her was one - (Secrets of the drug trials
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/programmes/panorama/6291773.stm)

This is what I mean about knowing what policies are so that they can be argued for (or against), but if people don’t know what policies are and people refuse to tell them then they remain in the dark.

I mean if you ask a politician what there mental health policy is and they tell you not to ask such questions and that you are being divisive for doing so, do you know if they are going to give counselling and guidance or fill two year olds full of Prozac.

It is the same with this issue as with any other if you don’t ask and don’t get an answer how do you know if they want to do something that you support? Also you should be wondering why they seem so reluctant to tell you when they want your support, if it is something you would support?

**

 

Ok so I should give you an idea of some of the things I support (if you want to take issue please start another thread) all of them have been brought up on the forums before. I’m presenting them in no particular order or merit, just a few things that came into my head as I was writing for this thread.

First I have no worry trying to describe my political influences and have many times here described myself as a pragmatic socialist with strong environmental tendencies

I’m a believer in democracy but understand why it has been called ‘the worse of all systems accepted when compared to the alternatives”, it can be messy and frustrating. In relation to the US (and UK) the problem as I see it is the difficulty of the first past the post electoral system where only one vote can be the difference between the winning and losing between gaining power, influence and a mandate compared with nothing, when all reason would seem to indicate that the ‘people’ were split. I’ve therefore indicated that I believe the US constitution should be re-written to bring in proportional representation. At the same time this could deal with another problem with the US, the two party hegemony. With PR the diverse groups within the two parties are more likely to split. For example people are more likely to vote for a party they want rather than just voting D or R just to keep out the other.

Link to this was some ideas on the media and politics. I would recommend stopping cross media ownership, so that if someone or a corporation owned radio channels they could not have interests in or own, television companies, newspapers, publishing houses or subscription websites and vis versa.
Another idea would be to bring in regional restrictions, television, newspapers or radio stations being produced for a certain area, have to be produced and owned by people from that area that are paying taxes to that area.
To limit the voice of wealthy owners I’d set up a public broadcasting corporation with real backing and teeth. So I’d have a national lottery (or nationalise the existing ones, or both) and give the money to an independent public television company that would be instructed as part of its mandate to give an alternative voice to those of the other large TV companies.
And finally as part of their licence, television and radio would have to give a limited amount of free airtime to political groups that poll more than 5% of the electorate. Political groups would not be allowed to buy advertising space or airtime. Debates would have to involve all candidates that poll 5% of the electorate and are independently run and arranged.

Why?



Because a lot of the problems with the US political system stem from the limited choice of political comment and opinion that is open to many people. At the same time a lot of the money that political parties have to raise goes on media messages and to me a lot of problems with this US politics stem from that money and what compromises and promises have to be given to get it.


Other things I’ve suggested over the years in regard to the US and world politics, cutting the US’s military budget and diverting the money to welfare programmes, trying to bringing in the Tobin tax, making the WTO and World Bank democratic, increasing the public transport infrastructure (then bringing in congestion zones). Cutting subsides to agricultural products that would be better off grown abroad (using the money to revamp the agricultural communities). Bringing in a drugs policy based on harm reduction and not on criminalisation. Ok I think that enough to be going on with there are many more but I think that gives you some ideas.

And I’m willing to discuss any of them or answer any questions anyone might have about them.

**

 

It's your approach. You are asking questions as if they were weapons. Like slinging arrows... Not as if you truely want to know anyone elses "why" of things. Try going back thru and looking at your posts. Such a flurry of questions that one cannot even begin to answer them all without attempting to write a book. Being grilled in this manner makes people defensive...

I doubt that you really want answers as much as you just want to impress someone with your AGGRESSIVENESS.

Try just thinking a minute, figure out a COUPLE questions that you TRUELY want the answers to and ask them, not as if you were trying to be a warrior, but as if you actually were going to be openminded enough to listen to the answers.

**

I suppose folks THINK they are learning something by watching the mainstream news. WRONG. If a body were TRUELY interested in anything besides the superficial, they would do MUCH research, and in that they may be able to discern who is the closest to SINCERE. And unfortunately, it always seems to be the guy who is made into an underdog by the media...

Honestly it's not so hard. Some folks just don't have much as far as power of discernment goes. Not only should people get nto the nitty gritty of things, but they simply need to be aware of the candidates "humanness". Most candidates are trying too hard to impress someone, either with their "professionalism", their appearance, their intelligence, their charisma. They might say anythign at all and hoodwink many. But some candidates have a certain REALITY to them. They speak from the heart, they look you in the eye. Not as a ploy to make you believe them, but simply because they are sincere. THOSE are the ones who we should be researching. And amazingly enough, those are the ones who seem to have a genuine grasp on how things should be. If I knew how to explain how to do this, I would. But I can only say that it's just not that hard to do. Being perceptive. This is how we judge who we want as friends and acquaintances in every day life...

That's just paranoia on your part. I get the feeling that an awful lot of people here are probably looking at you like that right now. The thought occured to me. Divide and conquor is a very common method. And THAT is what this thread started out being about.

Unnecessary. Actually, I'm a direct decendant of William Hooper, one of the signers of the Declaration of Independance. I believe we could simply take THAT and change the wording from being oppressed by the king of England to being oppressed by the US government.

Other than that It would take days or even weeks to put in writing the changes that need to be made, and chances are you would just pick my answers apart and question everything... We need MUCH LESS government interferance in our lives!!!

This is fun and relaxing? Actually, I think alot of folks on here take this rather seriously. "fun and relaxing" doesn't get anything accomplished. I think if ya want fun and relaxing you should go to the movies or out dancing...

**

Yea, some people ARE too busy to waste time talking to people with their ears closed.

It should be OBVIOUS what I stand for.
And by the way, I've timed this and so far it has taken me 45 minutes just to answer YOU. Don't you feel even the slightest bit SELFISH?

**

I'm taking time to answer you when I should be working on my UNDERGROUND NEWS RAG.

Anywhere from 150 regulars to over 300 when things are really hoppin'. You need to understand this is mostly just a LOCAL thing and this county is SMALL. My theory is if you feel intimidated with the sheer size of the enemy, start smaller where you can actually see an impact...
http://www.calhoununderground.wordpress.com

**

I should be working on my SURVIVAL garden.

BIG difference between "liking a spot of gardening" and growing food as a necessity so you don't go hungry.

**

I should be working on important GOODSTOCK issues.

NOPE, Goodstock as in http://www.goodstock2007.com. You didn't look very far. This is all over the internet.

**

We gather here to discuss the problems we all face. This is prelude to actually doing something about it.

Plenty questions allowed. Just don't forget, this being "hip forums" you can EXPECT that a large number of folks will be past the dickering and picking and want to move on to action.

53 minutes and counting...

 

u totally missed the point. I didnt fully explain what I meant with the deepression thing because this is not a debate! i DON'T WANT THIS THREAD RUNNING OFF INTO DIFFERENT ISSUES BUT IF U FEEL YOU ARE THAT MUCH SMARTER THAN ME I CAN BREAK IT DOWN TO YOU AND EXPLINA THE THING WITH DEPRESSION. Other than that, if you dont get it I cant do anything.