• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every persons position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

When Will the Bad Dream End?

Cold Highway

Dispenser of Negativity
DP Veteran
Joined
May 30, 2007
Messages
9,596
Reaction score
2,739
Location
Newburgh, New York and World 8: Dark Land
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Libertarian
Then there’s the fact that the U.S. government now goes to war, and is peripherally involved in even more wars, without anyone in America seeming to care. This is an era when threatening Eritrea is the least of it. The U.S. supports an Ethiopian invasion of Somalia – barely a blip in the news. The U.S. backs an ally, Israel, that invades its other ally, Lebanon, and maybe the talking heads care for about a day. The U.S. is essentially at war with its own nuclear-armed ally, Pakistan – and many Americans have no clue. The U.S. backs suicide bombers in Iran with possible ties to al Qaeda who are bent on changing Tehran’s government – not that most Americans even know the difference between Iran and al Qaeda, Persians and Arabs or Sunni and Shi’ia. And then, when an airplane passenger fails in his attempt to kill Americans on Christmas Day with explosives hidden in his underwear, the media scream that perhaps it's time to wage war on Yemen. No one of prominence even mentions that Obama was already bombing Yemen, days before the underwear bomber almost struck.
This is a reminder of why it’s so important to oppose a war before it begins. The Afghanistan war was always a terrible idea. Nine years ago, a few Americans stood up and pointed out that the 9/11 attacks were retaliation for U.S. foreign policy, which must be changed if we are ever to address the problem of terrorism. But these voices were in the minority. More than 90% of Americans cheered the invasion of Afghanistan. Now many on the left think it was folly, but the U.S. can’t pull out. Or they are quiet because their beloved president is doing the killing.

The Democrats practically all backed this war, and in both 2004 and 2008 attacked Bush for "neglecting" Afghanistan. Obama always promised us he’d be even worse on this war than his predecessor. It almost inspires nostalgia for Bush, who was essentially no more aggressive than Obama but who seemed to get away with less.

Obama has meanwhile "ended" the war in Iraq by keeping 50,000 troops there – troops involved in shooting and killing. Then there are the 100,000 contractors and permanent bases. Americans are snoozing. Who cares about Iraq? That’s so 2003. And on the civil liberties front – detention, rendition, surveillance, even the unilateral presidential right to assassinate US citizens he deems terrorists – Obama has pushed the envelope further than Bush. But what’s the big deal? Even conservatives who think Obama a totalitarian tyrant don’t seem to care about these, his most totalitarian and tyrannical policies.

They say that a perpetual nightmare is not like a normal nightmare in which the person can just wake up. Its a type of nightmare that a person chooses to stay in.

When Will the Bad Dream End? by Anthony Gregory
 

German guy

DP Veteran
Joined
Jun 9, 2010
Messages
5,187
Reaction score
4,255
Location
Berlin, Germany
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Moderate
At first, I put high hopes in Obama. But now we have to realize the problem runs deeper and obviously cannot be changed by elections. It's a systemtic problem. Once a particular government excessively expands government power, it's very hard to ever change it again. Electing someone like Obama was not enough.

The system is broken and I'm inclined to resignate. What else could be done to put an end to that? Is there even anything short of a revolution that would achieve that?

It's frightening, really.
 

TacticalEvilDan

Shankmasta Killa
DP Veteran
Joined
Feb 16, 2008
Messages
10,444
Reaction score
4,479
Location
Western NY and Geneva, CH
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Other
While I do not believe that a revolution is necessary to change the way the US government works, simply electing a Republican to teach the Democrats a lesson (or vice versa) isn't going to do squat to fix the problem.

The problem isn't which party is in power, but the way that both parties have been doing business. Both sides have been selling their votes to the highest bidder for many moons now.

What it's going to take to fix our current situation is to force a paradigm shift in Washington. We little people have to punish the selling of a Congressional vote, rather than rewarding it with re-election.
 

What if...?

DP Veteran
Joined
Sep 10, 2010
Messages
28,882
Reaction score
10,824
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Other
I would like to refer you to my "A Unified Theory..." post on this forum. Maybe we should just figure it out for ourselves. Get together to eliminate the problems caused by our headlong flight into an increasingly information saturated world. If we just got rid of the false assumptions we have made because of simple errors that don't threaten anybody's self interest I'm sure the world would be a much better place. Let's figure out exactly what we all AGREE on before we start to discuss what we don't.
 

TacticalEvilDan

Shankmasta Killa
DP Veteran
Joined
Feb 16, 2008
Messages
10,444
Reaction score
4,479
Location
Western NY and Geneva, CH
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Other
I've already read it.

Your unified theory is "gremlins did it," and a Happy Days reference.

I'd be happy to discuss it, but it would be a lot like trying to light a cloud on fire.
 

MaggieD

Supporting Member
Monthly Subscriber
DP Veteran
Joined
Jul 9, 2010
Messages
43,244
Reaction score
44,659
Location
Chicago Area
Gender
Female
Political Leaning
Moderate
While I do not believe that a revolution is necessary to change the way the US government works, simply electing a Republican to teach the Democrats a lesson (or vice versa) isn't going to do squat to fix the problem.

The problem isn't which party is in power, but the way that both parties have been doing business. Both sides have been selling their votes to the highest bidder for many moons now.

What it's going to take to fix our current situation is to force a paradigm shift in Washington. We little people have to punish the selling of a Congressional vote, rather than rewarding it with re-election.
I totally agree with you.

The only way I can figure the American people can force that paradigm shift is to have the polls begin showing that incumbants are losing elections. "Throw the Bums Out" has become my mantra. Of course, I know I'm wasting a vote, in most cases; but if enough people did that, I believe Congress would begin to get the message loud and clear.

"We're mad as hell and not going to take it anymore." No more 'business as usual.' Short of revolution, what else we got? Voters just keep doing the same thing over and over again and expecting a different result. We all know what that behavior describes.
 

TacticalEvilDan

Shankmasta Killa
DP Veteran
Joined
Feb 16, 2008
Messages
10,444
Reaction score
4,479
Location
Western NY and Geneva, CH
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Other
What we need is a guy (or gal, whichever) willing to run for a seat while wearing a clown costume.

When asked why they're dressed that way, all they have to say is, "I'm dressing on the outside the way Congress is on the inside. With any luck your vote will change that."

Ta-da! Instant election!
 

TurtleDude

warrior of the wetlands
DP Veteran
Joined
Oct 12, 2005
Messages
249,033
Reaction score
74,827
Location
Ohio
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Libertarian - Right
At first, I put high hopes in Obama. But now we have to realize the problem runs deeper and obviously cannot be changed by elections. It's a systemtic problem. Once a particular government excessively expands government power, it's very hard to ever change it again. Electing someone like Obama was not enough.

The system is broken and I'm inclined to resignate. What else could be done to put an end to that? Is there even anything short of a revolution that would achieve that?

It's frightening, really.
In the 30s FDR used the panic of the great depression to create a system that molded a permanent underclass dependent on the government. This class voted for welfare -socialism and as the money was redistributed to this class it grew and grew to the point that it is a self sustaining malignancy fueled by the progressive income tax which allows dem leaders to buy the votes of this class by promising them more and more government benefits that they never have to pay for

as long as dems can buy a large number of voters with other tax payers money, the problems we face will never be eliminated
 

What if...?

DP Veteran
Joined
Sep 10, 2010
Messages
28,882
Reaction score
10,824
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Other
Really? So you really don't think that false conclusions based on an incomplete understanding of the event or issue they were drawn from have no bearing whatsoever on the world we live in? That none of our furious ideological conflicts have anything to do these false conclusions, even though most of the arguments on both sides consist of claiming the other side doesn't "really" know what's going on? That "I know the real truth and you don't" isn't the basis of most of our conflicts? Really? Because if you really read my post and missed the point as thoroughly as your reply would indicate, I really need to take a look at it so it doesn't make another gremlin. your reply is a perfect example of what I am trying to point out. Your failure to understand what I was trying to say has led you to decide that my point is silly and irrelevant, so you will tend to dismiss anything else I have to say without even bothering to hear it, and encourage others to as well, so that someone who might find it useful might never bother to read it BECAUSE you think it silly. Understand?
Please understand that I'm not attacking you or your opinions, but dismissal is not rebuttal. And I am trying to propose something to encourage and facilitate dialogue. Your comments prove you didn't understand what I was trying to say, because they didn't respond to it at all, just dismissed out of hand. I apologize for having confused you.
 

samsmart

DP Veteran
Joined
Dec 7, 2009
Messages
10,316
Reaction score
6,470
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Other
I totally agree with you.

The only way I can figure the American people can force that paradigm shift is to have the polls begin showing that incumbants are losing elections. "Throw the Bums Out" has become my mantra. Of course, I know I'm wasting a vote, in most cases; but if enough people did that, I believe Congress would begin to get the message loud and clear.

"We're mad as hell and not going to take it anymore." No more 'business as usual.' Short of revolution, what else we got? Voters just keep doing the same thing over and over again and expecting a different result. We all know what that behavior describes.
Voting out incumbents won't do anything when fresmen Congressmen get elected and can be bought out just as easily as the incumbents elected into office were bought out when they were freshmen Congressmen.
 

allsogreat

Active member
Joined
Sep 11, 2008
Messages
495
Reaction score
148
Location
cultural center of the universe
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Very Conservative
While I do not believe that a revolution is necessary to change the way the US government works, simply electing a Republican to teach the Democrats a lesson (or vice versa) isn't going to do squat to fix the problem.

The problem isn't which party is in power, but the way that both parties have been doing business. Both sides have been selling their votes to the highest bidder for many moons now.

What it's going to take to fix our current situation is to force a paradigm shift in Washington. We little people have to punish the selling of a Congressional vote, rather than rewarding it with re-election.
you nailed it....Got to DUMP the incumbent members of Congress....H
 

samsmart

DP Veteran
Joined
Dec 7, 2009
Messages
10,316
Reaction score
6,470
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Other
What we need is a guy (or gal, whichever) willing to run for a seat while wearing a clown costume.

When asked why they're dressed that way, all they have to say is, "I'm dressing on the outside the way Congress is on the inside. With any luck your vote will change that."

Ta-da! Instant election!
No, what we need is a guy who can get elected without taking any donations for his re-election campaign so he won't be int he pocket of contributors. But that won't happen any time soon.
 

samsmart

DP Veteran
Joined
Dec 7, 2009
Messages
10,316
Reaction score
6,470
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Other
Isn't that what I said? :D
Not exactly. Because it would take any kind of revolution to implement what I suggested. Just a politician who is 1) savvy enough to be able to get elected without using any contributions to get indebted to special interests and 2) have the capacity and competency to govern once actually elected. I don't see such a thing even possible until 10-20 years from now.
 

What if...?

DP Veteran
Joined
Sep 10, 2010
Messages
28,882
Reaction score
10,824
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Other
I've already read it.

Your unified theory is "gremlins did it," and a Happy Days reference.

I'd be happy to discuss it, but it would be a lot like trying to light a cloud on fire.
By the way, I can produce a cloud of gasoline vapor for you any time you like. And I'll bring a lighter. Would that make it easier?
 

German guy

DP Veteran
Joined
Jun 9, 2010
Messages
5,187
Reaction score
4,255
Location
Berlin, Germany
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Moderate
In the 30s FDR used the panic of the great depression to create a system that molded a permanent underclass dependent on the government. This class voted for welfare -socialism and as the money was redistributed to this class it grew and grew to the point that it is a self sustaining malignancy fueled by the progressive income tax which allows dem leaders to buy the votes of this class by promising them more and more government benefits that they never have to pay for

as long as dems can buy a large number of voters with other tax payers money, the problems we face will never be eliminated
Does it really work that way? I've often heard that many of those who would actually benefit financially from redistribution (poorer people in rural areas) more often vote for the Republicans because of other reasons (moral convictions, etc), while many of those who actually lose most (wealthier and intellectual people in urban regions) more often vote for the Democrats because of other reasons (moral convictions, etc).

So maybe, in political preferences, there are many more factors at work that mere material profit.

(Just an idea that came to my mind.)
 
Last edited:

samsmart

DP Veteran
Joined
Dec 7, 2009
Messages
10,316
Reaction score
6,470
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Other
Does it really work that way? I've often heard that many of those who would actually benefit financially from redistribution (poorer people in rural areas) more often vote for the Republicans because of other reasons (moral convictions, etc), while many of those who actually lose most (wealthier and intellectual people in urban regions) more often vote for the Democrats because of other reasons (moral convictions, etc).

So maybe, in political preferences, there are many more factors at work that mere material profit.

(Just an idea that came to my mind.)
You only think that because you're a product of European socialism, and therefore can afford to have ethics.

Here in the more capitalistic United States, Americans only have the morals they can fit into their budget.
 
Top Bottom