Well, only one more penstroke to go before dictatorship...

[PeteEU]

Your country? Didnt realize you was British.
And evidently not.

You do know that just about every country in Europe have a parliamentary democracy right? No one, not even the British elect their leaders directly...

 

[kaya'08]

You do know that just about every country in Europe have a parliamentary democracy right? No one, not even the British elect their leaders directly...

Then don't tell me. Tell Maximus who insists Britain is undemocratic because we didnt elect Gordon Brown???? :shock:

 

[Maximus Zeebra]

Then don't tell me. Tell Maximus who insists Britain is undemocratic because we didnt elect Gordon Brown???? :shock:

I am just saying its hipocracy to point the finger at the presidential election in Russia, where Medvedev won, and then claim he was appointed, when the actual only one appointed was your own current prime minister.

Thats the type of horse**** I am incredibly tired of being force fed by western media and governments, including the Brits.

 

[kaya'08]

No.. The parties "elect" their presidential candidate.

Then the people are left selecting the president of the party they support, or selecting the president of the other party.

I simplified what i basically meant. In other words the two candidates left are the ones that have garnered the most support and will campaign against each other for the Presidency.
The people 'vote' for the candidate indirectly by voting for the party that have elected the candidate they want.

Pretty much yeah. By saying all the popular things, and then not delivering. What a fake piece of crap, just like any president. Personally I do not understand the whole popularity of Obama, hes just another asshole. Actually I do understand it somewhat though.. Any guy elected instead of Hitler back in 1942 or 1943 would also enjoy enourmous popularity around the world.

IMO its because Americans got deathly bored of Bush and the conspiracies surrounding his presidency and the wars he had declared. Obama came along with a totally different political tone, he wasn't just 'another republican', he was a Democrat and that's as much change as you can get from the usual Republican tone that had been severly damaged by the Bush administration, and that's why everyone may or may not have run to the polls before thinking.

I advised you to see the movie "idiocracy", it sucks, but its where democracy is headed.
Its not because of the movie theory things turn that way, but because of democracy and the way it functions. Dumb people elect dumb policians, dumb politicians make dumb people even dumber, and dumber people elect dumber politicians and so fourth.

Hmm. Ill have to watch it.

 

[PeteEU]

Then don't tell me. Tell Maximus who insists Britain is undemocratic because we didnt elect Gordon Brown???? :shock:

Well you did not technically elect Gordon Brown, and yes it is undemocratic in some ways that a country does not directly elect its leader. However very few countries do that.

 

[kaya'08]

I am just saying its hipocracy to point the finger at the presidential election in Russia, where Medvedev won, and then claim he was appointed, when the actual only one appointed was your own current prime minister.

Thats the type of horse**** I am incredibly tired of being force fed by western media and governments, including the Brits.

Please provide evidence to back up your claims that Britons are exclusively going around saying this. And convienient of you to bring it up.

 

[kaya'08]

Well you did not technically elect Gordon Brown, and yes it is undemocratic in some ways that a country does not directly elect its leader. However very few countries do that.

When the PM resigns, thats a totally different matter?
Under the parliamentary system when the PM resigns the party is obliged to appoint somebody else and that happened within Democratic guidlines. Nice try.

 

[PeteEU]

When the PM resigns, thats a totally different matter?
Under the parliamentary system when the PM resigns the party is obliged to appoint somebody else and that happened within Democratic guidlines. Nice try.

Does not matter if he resigns. You did not elect Tony Blair either, nor will you elect Cameron as PM (provided his party wins) at the next election. You do not vote directly for said persons.

It is the party, and only the party that chooses who should lead them, and hence who should sit in the PM chair if said party wins.

Like it or not, that is how it has been done for since forever and is done in many countries around the world.

 

[kaya'08]

Does not matter if he resigns. You did not elect Tony Blair either, nor will you elect Cameron as PM (provided his party wins) at the next election. You do not vote directly for said persons.

Yes i know that. Did you read:

I simplified what i basically meant. In other words the two candidates left are the ones that have garnered the most support and will campaign against each other for the Presidency.
The people 'vote' for the candidate indirectly by voting for the party that have elected the candidate they want.

It is the party, and only the party that chooses who should lead them, and hence who should sit in the PM chair if said party wins.

Exactly. Refer above. So what part of the UK is undemocratic? You never answered that you just diverted and stated we do not elect the PM but the party, something i said in this thread first, to MZ to refute his pathetic allegations against the UK.

 

[PeteEU]

Exactly. Refer above. So what part of the UK is undemocratic? You never answered that you just diverted and stated we do not elect the PM but the party, something i said in this thread first, to MZ to refute his pathetic allegations against the UK.

I never said the UK was "undemocratic", just pointed out what the facts were. I never commented on MZ comments, since I have zero clue on what he is rambling about

 

[kaya'08]

I never said the UK was "undemocratic", just pointed out what the facts were. I never commented on MZ comments, since I have zero clue on what he is rambling about

You didnt, I was actually refuting what MZ said. But you are right.

 

[Maximus Zeebra]

I simplified what i basically meant. In other words the two candidates left are the ones that have garnered the most support and will campaign against each other for the Presidency.
The people 'vote' for the candidate indirectly by voting for the party that have elected the candidate they want.

I think having a president in a country who claims to be democratic is wrong.. Away with parties, away with individuals in politics is real democracy, let the people decide. Draft parliaments, keep these people independent and have them vote independent one every single case.

Aside from that, I do believe the American two party state is even worse than European parliament democracy. And I am certain about the trend that multi party politics in European parliament democracy is also turning into a two party state, eventually. Like every democracy with parties will.

IMO its because Americans got deathly bored of Bush and the conspiracies surrounding his presidency and the wars he had declared. Obama came along with a totally different political tone, he wasn't just 'another republican', he was a Democrat and that's as much change as you can get from the usual Republican tone that had been severly damaged by the Bush administration, and that's why everyone may or may not have run to the polls before thinking.

You can say my opinion about this is stupid. But I certainly believe that people love Obama, MOSTLY because he isnt George W. Bush..

Even though his retoric and actions are slightly different, he is still just another Washington piece of ****.. I dont see him reversing the Republican military program. He is not decreasing the military budget to pay the debt. GWB and the republicans doubled annual military spending in the US, and on top of that slammed taxpayers with the Iraq and Afghan costs on top of that.

Any president who follows a mess like that and do not decrease the military spending 50% again to former levels, makes me wonder if he is really that different.

Aside from that, his speech to the UN was pathetic, and just increased my suspision that he is just another one of those Washington crooks who plays to get popular. His super national sentiments, makes me wonder if there is something actually very dangerous going on in the US at the moment, whereas the president always have to say stupid **** like "the US is the best" in different ways. He seems out of touch with reality.

Hmm. Ill have to watch it.

Yes, do so.. Very interesting perspective on democracy and what it is turning into.. I can see those things happening in current events. The funny thing is that the movie was kind of sensored in the US. It was never allowed to reach the masses.

 

[Maximus Zeebra]

Please provide evidence to back up your claims that Britons are exclusively going around saying this. And convienient of you to bring it up.

Just review any US or UK maintreat media channel coverage of the Russian election or the aftermath, or their perspective on the results.

I hear it all the time on BBC, read it in the economist, or other US/UK/European papers that Medvedev was appointed by Putin, and really is just a representative of Putin..

Its ridiculous, anti-Russian post coldwar bull****.

 

[Maximus Zeebra]

Well you did not technically elect Gordon Brown, and yes it is undemocratic in some ways that a country does not directly elect its leader. However very few countries do that.

In most parliamentary democracies its quite the norm, that the post of party leader when party is carrying the prime minister post, is NOT changed during the 4 year period between elections.

Thus.. It is normal that people know who will be the prime minister until the next election, and basically elect one when they approve of their party, by electing their party in the election.

 

[PeteEU]

In most parliamentary democracies its quite the norm, that the post of party leader when party is carrying the prime minister post, is NOT changed during the 4 year period between elections.

Thus.. It is normal that people know who will be the prime minister until the next election, and basically elect one when they approve of their party, by electing their party in the election.

Actually it has happened twice so far in this decade as far as I know. The UK and Denmark, but yea it is the norm (but not legally required) for parties to call a general election first.

 

[kaya'08]

I think having a president in a country who claims to be democratic is wrong.. Away with parties, away with individuals in politics is real democracy, let the people decide. Draft parliaments, keep these people independent and have them vote independent one every single case.

Does your dislike of the American or European parliamentary system make it undemocratic? No. So how comes when most of Europe has the same system as the UK, is the UK in specific undemocratic? Elitist propaganda against a majority EU-realist state, perhaps?

You can say my opinion about this is stupid. But I certainly believe that people love Obama, MOSTLY because he isnt George W. Bush..

So do i, i wont lie.

Even though his retoric and actions are slightly different, he is still just another Washington piece of ****.. I dont see him reversing the Republican military program. He is not decreasing the military budget to pay the debt. GWB and the republicans doubled annual military spending in the US, and on top of that slammed taxpayers with the Iraq and Afghan costs on top of that.

He was suppose to promote sustainability and halve the debt. Instead, he nationalized half the damn country and made it reach a record peak.

Any president who follows a mess like that and do not decrease the military spending 50% again to former levels, makes me wonder if he is really that different.

It does need some reductions, especially in the face of a crises where he finds himself preaching to everybody to spend and pay their taxes and tellings Banks etc how to spend. But im not his financial advisor. Maybe the increase in spending was needed to provide the military enough resources to carry out its fronts in the ME. Im not too sure.

Yes, do so.. Very interesting perspective on democracy and what it is turning into.. I can see those things happening in current events. The funny thing is that the movie was kind of sensored in the US. It was never allowed to reach the masses.

When was it released?

 

[kaya'08]

Just review any US or UK maintreat media channel coverage of the Russian election or the aftermath, or their perspective on the results.

I hear it all the time on BBC, read it in the economist, or other US/UK/European papers that Medvedev was appointed by Putin, and really is just a representative of Putin..

Its ridiculous, anti-Russian post coldwar bull****.

I dont think so. I live in the UK. The BBC, for example, certainly mentioned the whole fraudlent voting issue going on, but they didnt deliver it to our door 24/7 or make it an exclusive. Infact neither did ITV, Al-Jazeera UK, Times or Gaurdian. Their is certainly valid questions on the whole state of Democracy down their but - who are you or anybody else for that matter to say what the private sector should and shouldnt say in the media? Let them go crazy on it. If the government isnt telling them to do it, its private sector propaganda and it isnt the official stance of the state.

 

[Maximus Zeebra]

Does your dislike of the American or European parliamentary system make it undemocratic? No. So how comes when most of Europe has the same system as the UK, is the UK in specific undemocratic? Elitist propaganda against a majority EU-realist state, perhaps?

My dislike for it doesnt make it undemocratic. The reality of politics, governance and elections in the west makes it undemocratic. The UK isnt specificly more undemocratic than European systems, but more broken then most of them, just like Italy is the most broken democracy in Europe, since the whole process is corrupted under special media ownership and semi dictatorship.

He was suppose to promote sustainability and halve the debt. Instead, he nationalized half the damn country and made it reach a record peak.

It left me astonished and surprised that a democrat did that, following Republican policies. Seemingly he is now about to move the US into irreversible collapse.

It does need some reductions, especially in the face of a crises where he finds himself preaching to everybody to spend and pay their taxes and tellings Banks etc how to spend. But im not his financial advisor. Maybe the increase in spending was needed to provide the military enough resources to carry out its fronts in the ME. Im not too sure.

What the US obviously have to do is decrease spendings and increase income. Raise tax and cut military expenditure is the easy solution..

Do you know if they cut military spending to pre-Bush levels(about 210 billion annual saving), and increase taxes with 100 billion a year(1/25th), it will still take more than a full presidential term to pay back the stimulous debts. imagine then how difficult it will be without doing that..

When was it released?

2006
Idiocracy (2006)

I found it so unfunny the humour.. But the movie got the be the most politicly correct movie ever. Which makes it awesome.

 

[Private Hudson]

Czech court clears Lisbon Treaty

The Czech constitutional court has ruled that the Lisbon Treaty is in line with the constitution, clearing the way for President Vaclav Klaus to sign it.

The Czech Republic is the only EU member yet to ratify the treaty, and the decision removes the penultimate hurdle to its passage.

The Eurosceptic Mr Klaus, who was awaiting the court's decision, has said he will not further oppose the treaty.

The treaty was drawn up to streamline decision-making in the 27-member body.

Its supporters say it will allow the bloc to operate more efficiently and give it greater influence in world affairs. Critics say it will cede too many national powers to Brussels.

'No obstacle'

If Mr Klaus signs, that will pave the way for the treaty to come into effect throughout the EU as early as 1 December.

BBC NEWS | Europe | Czech court clears Lisbon Treaty

One more penstroke and we are there... :2wave:

 

[PeteEU]

One more penstroke and we are there... :2wave:

Was expected. The anti-EU crowd had no leg to stand on and they knew it, but their goal of delaying the ratification was achieved.

 

[Private Hudson]

Was expected. The anti-EU crowd had no leg to stand on and they knew it, but their goal of delaying the ratification was achieved.

You are right! It was a tough battle with the anti-EU crowd. But this is the normal way of things. Every EU-treaty has been delayed.

The only thing that matters is the result.

 

[Private Hudson]

It's over!

Czech leader signs Lisbon Treaty

Czech President Vaclav Klaus has signed the Lisbon Treaty, the final step in the treaty's ratification.

The Czech Republic was the only EU country not to have approved the treaty, which was drawn up to streamline decision-making in the EU.

Mr Klaus signed the treaty shortly after the Czech constitutional court rejected a complaint against it.

A BBC correspondent says Mr Klaus accused the court of bias and said the Czech Republic was no longer sovereign.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/europe/8340664.stm

Lisbon Treaty will enter into force Dec 1!

:2party:

 

[C. Gerstle]

The European Dream lives on!!!

Est Europa Nunc Unita
Est Unita Maneat
Una in Diversitate
Pacem Mundi Augeat

Semper Regnant in Europa
Fides et Iustitia
Et Libertas Populorum
In Maiore Patria

Cives, Floreat Europa
Opus Mugnum Vocas Vos
Stellae Signa sunt in Caelo
aurae Quae, Iugnant Nos

 

[kaya'08]

The European Dream lives on!!!

Est Europa Nunc Unita
Est Unita Maneat
Una in Diversitate
Pacem Mundi Augeat

Semper Regnant in Europa
Fides et Iustitia
Et Libertas Populorum
In Maiore Patria

Cives, Floreat Europa
Opus Mugnum Vocas Vos
Stellae Signa sunt in Caelo
aurae Quae, Iugnant Nos

Its the elitist dream not ours. And dont get too yippy dippy just yet.

 

[Maximus Zeebra]

Its the elitist dream not ours. And dont get too yippy dippy just yet.

http://www.europarl.europa.eu/charter/pdf/text_en.pdf

Dammit. I just hate the fact that they established the charter of fundamental rights all across Europe. :roll: In countries that have some or none of those rights already established. Its just terrible to have all of them established everywhere. :doh

Certainly a bad thing that European elitists are starting to compete with American crooks, and Chinese capitalists. Or is it :thinking

I especially hate this one.

Health care
Everyone has the right of access to preventive health care and the right to benefit from medical
treatment under the conditions established by national laws and practices. A high level of human
health protection shall be ensured in the definition and implementation of all Union policies and
activities.

I want to be the only one with that right. Sucks that I have to share doctor and hospital with sick people. :doh