 sj |
||
|
||
BS: what are politicians for?
|
|
|
Subject: NOT BS:what are politicians for? From: Mr Happy Date: 10 Aug 02 - 08:47 PM i've observed a number of diverse threads lately. in relation to MC & what it's for: blues & folk & other self made musics- there's the PEL[politicians cynical cockup] debacle in UK. reading another thread about weather, it seems Politicians can't do the right thing regarding relief to fire/drought stricken areas. we all have votes [what are they for?] in 'democracies' there's 'universal suffrage'so we can all vote for politicians. after work today, me & colleagues discussed why in uk, kids excluded from school because of behaviour disorders don't get other forms of tuition & are just left to idle away their time in indolence &/or crime? gwb is leading us US & us into ww3-he's a politician. why is it that politicians [who've been 'democratically elected by all of us] hardly ever do what's in our best interest? your thoughts/ comments please. |
|
Subject: RE: what are politicians for? From: Rt Revd Sir jOhn from Hull Date: 10 Aug 02 - 10:49 PM i do'nt knoe , but im glad i found my wheely bin, i am thinking were to put Brian when i go to whitby, i rung up my frend called dave 9not dodgy dave, a different one) but he was'nt in.john |
|
Subject: RE: BS: what are politicians for? From: Kaleea Date: 11 Aug 02 - 12:32 AM Q: What are they for?!? . . . A: We have to have somebody besides the lawyers to hate, don't we? Not to mention all those terrific benefits--which get better as the level of gov't. gets higher. hmmmmmmmmmmm . . .am I in the wrong business! |
|
Subject: RE: BS: what are politicians for? From: Little Hawk Date: 11 Aug 02 - 12:45 AM Well... It's fairly easy for democracy to function in a small community of a few hundred or a few thousand people, where everyone sort of knows the people they are voting for, and where there are no political parties. I've seen this in town councils, and in a North American Indian traditionally-based community. If you actually know the people you're voting for, then you have a fairly good idea of what you can expect from them. If there are no political parties involved, so much the better...people can run on their own merits and vote according to their own conscience, without pressure to vote "party line" after they're elected. When you get above 20,000 or so people it gets a lot more cumbersome, and then the propaganda starts. Since people don't necessarily know much about whom they are voting for, they have to trust what the media tells them. If the media is mostly owned by a few rich people, and the politicians are chosen largely by those same rich people (from their own ranks, usually) then you can expect a ton of misleading propaganda. How do you sort through it? Not easy. How many people have the time to truly sort through it? Add political parties to the picture, and you have a form of entrenched, self-serving corruption that can only get worse with every passing decade...and it does. The best watchdog on this is an alert press, but as I noted before the press is generally owned by the rich and powerful...although there are always independent columnists with something useful to say. TV news is hopeless, since it goes into nothing in much depth (generally) but just tosses pithy "sound bites" around. TV news is really entertainment (like the National Enquirer), not news. Now when you've got a country with many millions of people in it...and dominated by two or more very corrupt and selfish political parties who are only in it to WIN, not to serve the public...then you've got a fairly hopeless situation. When banks and big business own the political parties, it's absolutely hopeless from the point of view of the ordinary public, who are in truth shut out of the process. Their vote is nothing more than a rubber stamp. That's what is happening at the present. What's the solution? I'd say, completely abolish ALL political parties, vote for individuals on a LOCAL basis, have those individuals form regional councils, have those councils form a national parliament representing all regions in a fair manner, and decide policy on a group basis rather than creating king-like presidents and prime ministers, who are simply a focus for a lot of fantastic image-building and propaganda on the part of the existing power structure. Imagine a government that is not divided into 2 or 3 or 4 competing power blocs that hate each other most of the time...but one that is formed of a large number of totally independent individuals who represent their parts of the country in the best way they can. Imagine no more Redemocrapublicants, no more Liberal/Conservative/BocQuebecois/CanadianAlliance/NewDemocratic nonsense (those are the Canadian parties). Furthermore, provide an equal amount of funding to ALL candidates who run and BINGO...the business lobby is eliminated! Said money to come from a public fund, and to allow a short and not very expensive election campaign, long on content and devoid of partisan propaganda. It could be done. Will it? Ha! I doubt that I will live that long. In the meantime, what we've got is better than an outright dictatorship...but it's no more honest and only slightly more moral...and that is mostly because of our customs and legal traditions, which tend to carry on regardless of unscrupulous politicians. The reason it's very hard to have a healthy functioning "democracy" (in the western sense) in a country like Russia, for example, is that they've had so little of it at any time in the past. They do not have that base of custom and legal tradition that one does in the USA, Canada, France or England. Our democracies have a good social tradition as a foundation, but they have been corrupted by the political parties which were all bought out long ago by the big financial players. From Tammany Hall to Exxon and the World Bank. And so it goes... It isn't that politicians are necessarily bad people...it's that Big Money has killed real democracy. - LH |
|
Subject: RE: BS: what are politicians for? From: John O'L Date: 11 Aug 02 - 01:35 AM Little Hawk, I'm so glad to see you write that. I've been saying a lot of that for years, but no-one seemed to listen. Do you get that too? Democracy worked (for a while) in ancient Greece because, as you said, Athens was then a small place where everyone knew, at least to a degree, who and what they were voting for. What we so proudly refer to as democracy is nothing like the stuff the ancient Greeks were using. What we do is to more or less authorise somebody (who we regard as not as bad as the alternative) to do as they please. I have also been known to suggest a democracy of small regional councils, and with the current state of I.T., that would be all that's required to arrive at national consensus on any and all matters. Glenn |
|
Subject: RE: BS: what are politicians for? From: Micca Date: 11 Aug 02 - 05:54 AM I confess I strongly dislike Politics in general and most politicians in particular (they are right up there with used car salespersons, lawyers, advertisers and Estate agents, and Journalists as Liars and cheats), but I ALWAYS vote. I have an infallible(for me) way of deciding how to vote in elections, which I commend to you. I found many years ago that frequently there is NO ONE I want to vote FOR but there is ALWAYS someone(or party) I want to vote AGAINST!!!! and that Is what I do I vote for the party or individual I dislike least. This works for me, draw up a table and put on it the partys and what bad things each party has done in the last parliament, (local authority session, period of office,) and vote for the ones with the shortest list, Miccas Motto " when in doubt Vote Against" |
|
Subject: RE: BS: what are politicians for? From: smallpiper Date: 11 Aug 02 - 06:06 AM They're good for keeping out draughts but bugger all else |
|
Subject: RE: BS: what are politicians for? From: Little Hawk Date: 11 Aug 02 - 08:00 AM Yeah, Micca, if you're going to vote that is a pretty workable system.... Glenn - Naw, hardly anyone ever listens. They'd rather just stay in the not-so-comfortable rut they are already accustomed to. Better the devil they know than the brighter possibility they don't. Besides, to change these existing structures would require a massive reassessment of just about everything on the part of the majority of the people, and people are generally ruled by habit and inertia. I suspect that nothing short of a huge cataclysm in human events will initiate real change. Nature may provide such a cataclysm eventually. In the meantime there is some gradual evolution happening, but it's all controlled by money, and that is the source of the problem. - LH |
|
Subject: RE: BS: what are politicians for? From: Cllr Date: 11 Aug 02 - 12:42 PM Some parts of ancient greece did have total participation of its citizens in politics. However to support the citizen involvement there was about a five to one ratio of workers who did not have the right to vote. With any sizable habitation some people will have to make decisions and need specific relevent background knowledge (and how to use it appropriatly) so they are unable to carry out the functions (commerce, farming, building etc) that are needed to have the city state operate. If there is a presumption that someone is needed to do this strategic role as almost every political system requires some sort of operator (even anarcho-syndicalism)and your view is that you want to do away with politicians and let the people have greater particapation you are recommending copying classical greek democracy and the ability to operate a democratic society of this model depended on a slave based economy. Cllr
|
|
Subject: RE: BS: what are politicians for? From: GUEST Date: 11 Aug 02 - 01:56 PM My fellow citizens, the other party has been buggering you for ten years....now give us a chance. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: what are politicians for? From: Little Hawk Date: 11 Aug 02 - 02:41 PM Ha! Good one, GUEST. Cllr - You're quite correct that the Greek model of democracy had many flaws, and was not quite so democratic as is generally assumed. I would not select the classical Greeks as the ultimate example of democracy by any means. Many Native American tribes were far more democratic and egalitarian than the Greeks, and the American revolutionaries incorporated many Native American concepts in founding the governmental structure of the USA. This is not an attempt on my part to represent Native American life as ideal, but merely to indicate that they did have some progressive ideas in their social philosophy...ideas worth taking another look at now. I'm not suggesting doing away with politicians, not by any means. I am suggesting doing away with the entrenched power structures (political parties and big private financial backers) who control politicians at present...and keep them from actually representing the general public...which is what they are supposedly there to do. All they are really doing now is perpetuating an existing power structure and expanding its control over the population, its money, and its resources by any means possible. Bread and circuses...plus a small war when all else fails to keep up their approval ratings. - LH |
|
Subject: RE: BS: what are politicians for? From: Ebbie Date: 11 Aug 02 - 05:47 PM Well, if 'politics' is the art of getting something done, then 'politicians' are those who get things done... It should not inherently be a dirty word. I truly believe that most people enter politics with the goal of making things better, but that the pursuit of perceived power is so seductive that it corrupts all but the most principled. I say 'perceived' power, because another cause of corruption, I think, is the recognition that it is VERY difficult indeed to get enough power to make an actual difference, so the person may take the easy way. Have enough people do that- and you have the kind of mess we have today. Little Hawk, you said: Imagine a government that is not divided into 2 or 3 or 4 competing power blocs that hate each other most of the time... I think part of the problem is that they DON'T hate each other; they understand each other very well. Kind of like the bitter-enemy professional 'wrestlers' who were seen leaving the arena in the same car.
|
|
Subject: RE: BS: what are politicians for? From: Little Hawk Date: 11 Aug 02 - 07:04 PM Ebbie - That is a beautifully accurate assessment of the situation (wish I'd said it...:-)). It's the old divide and conquer principle, and boy, does it ever work. On the larger world scene larger power blocs play divide and conquer with countries, racial groups, religious groups, etc... The fact is, 99% of the people in the world are not at war most of the time, and they have little inclination to be if left alone by the power brokers who pull the strings, sell the arms, and spread the propaganda. But when their sons are ordered to pick up a gun and die miserably on some mountainside...most of them go, convinced that they are defending some high ideal and defeating some terrible evil. I think you are also right that most politicians start out their career genuinely wanting to make things better for people. Then the system gets them in its clammy hands, and they are soon lost to it. - LH |
|
Subject: RE: BS: what are politicians for? From: John O'L Date: 11 Aug 02 - 07:31 PM Cllr, I take your point regarding ancient Greek democracy being sustained by slaves, and if I suggested copying that model, that's not what I meant to do. I meant to use it as an example of government that is closer to the governed. Today we have the capability to move the governed closer to the governors without the need for an underclass of slaves. There are those who think the current system is creating such an underclass even as we speak. (Or type.) Glenn |
|
Subject: RE: BS: what are politicians for? From: Bee-dubya-ell Date: 11 Aug 02 - 07:34 PM "A Modest Proposal" The paradox of modern representative democracy is that the type of person who is most apt to seek public office is exactly the type of person that we should least want to hold that office. To willingly give power to someone who is power-seeking is a form of insanity. The only way to have truly disinterested representation is to do away with the electoral system as we know it and institute something similar to selective service. One workable scenario would be: A few "candidates" are selected at random. They complete a form very similar to a job application which details their qualifications and their opinions on a few important issues. The electorate votes for the best-qualified, based entirely on the information given on their applications. No speeches, no advertising, no BS. The "winner" serves a two-year term in a governmental capacity, and, just to keep anyone from intentionally throwing the election, the also-rans do a thousand hours of community service over the same two-year period. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: what are politicians for? From: John O'L Date: 11 Aug 02 - 07:44 PM Wealth and power have always gone together and we probably won't seperate them, but mega-wealth has changed the equation. Wealth is of human proportions, mega-wealth is inhuman. For democratic government, mega-wealth needs to be removed. Should be easy. Glenn |
|
Subject: RE: BS: what are politicians for? From: Bobert Date: 11 Aug 02 - 07:59 PM Hey, where's DougR when we need him the most. Jus funnin' Little Hawk: Yeah, brother, you've laid out a much preferable sytem to the lame one we have now. The most important feature is public financing. This would take care of 99% of the problems of being in public service. I would, however, suggest one change to your system. Rather than no parties, I'd rather see a bunch and based on the number of registrations in each a porportionate number of representatives would be involved. So, if there are 10% of the voters who register as Green Party members then 10% of the representative would be from the Green Party. If 2% of the voters registered as LaRouche folks than 2% of the reps.... Yeah, you get it. Then, you really do come closer to a truely democratic sysytem as everyone as some voice and representation. Democracy, as it is practiced and perhaps under you one party system leave out a lot of folks on both ends. Hey, I would rather have a right wing militia KKK type making his pitch in the House of Representatives than feeling so excluded that he's gonna blow up a federal building. Likewise, on my side, I'd like a Martin Luther King, a Dr.Ben Spock or Ralph Nader arguing on my behalf. Yeah, that seem to be a more inclusive system where the middle doesn't always win everything. Bobert |
|
Subject: RE: BS: what are politicians for? From: Deda Date: 11 Aug 02 - 08:39 PM I don't have any solution but I want to point out that women had no franchise, no vote, no education, not much of anything in ancient Greece -- except for the heteirae, sort of like Geishas I guess. Wives had to live out their lives in the women's quarters. A friend of my parents, many years ago, admitted that he had voted for Goldwater and then gone on to vote for George McGovern. My father was flabbergasted and asked how could the same person cast those two votes? He answered that he never listened to what they were saying, he just tried to discern which candidate was a more honest person, and that one got his vote. It would be a great system in theory, but his example showed that it meant voting for the loser. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: what are politicians for? From: Ebbie Date: 11 Aug 02 - 08:43 PM Bee-Dubya-ell, there is one problem that would have to be addressed if you used the 'selective' system as you say in A few "candidates" are selected at random. They complete a form very similar to a job application which details their qualifications and their opinions on a few important issues. That is those people who genuinely do NOT want any part of it. I have some experience with that: Among the Amish, they draw 'by lot' their candidates for pastorship. The name of every male member(HA!) in good standing in the church goes into a literal hat from which x number of names are drawn to be considered. I believe they then draw a second time from the smaller pool the name of the man who has been selected. That man is accepted as being chosen by God. The story goes that one relative of mine was selected that way; he was totally unsuited for the position and they say he wept before and after each sermon he had to give. Of course, I do realize this is not what you were proposing. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: what are politicians for? From: Little Hawk Date: 11 Aug 02 - 10:38 PM Bobert - Yeah, that's a reasonable idea, to be sure. I still don't like parties, though, because they put pressure on their members to conform, and that is not good. I'm not for a one-party system, I'm for a NO-party system, ideally. However, if there are to be parties, then I think proportional representation is a fairly good idea, and it's more democratic. It usually results in coalition governments, which are less stable but also less dictatorial in nature than governments with a single party controlling a majority of seats. Canada has had some minority governments (which in effect became coalition governments) and they generally resulted in a lot more progressive legislation than most majority government did, and they weren't so damned arrogant. This can't happen in the USA right now, because there are really only 2 parties with a solid power base...and they mean to KEEP it that way. They feed from the same trough and their sponsors own the media. - LH |
|
Subject: RE: BS: what are politicians for? From: Cllr Date: 12 Aug 02 - 02:58 AM Lottery politics was practiced by some greek city states, wherby all citizens names were entered and one picked out at random to be the leader. Their private fortunes would be confiscated and then tied to the city state and after a period of about two/three years when they had finished the term of office their private fortunate would be returned to them and adjusted to match the fortunes of the city. Cllr |
|
Subject: RE: BS: what are politicians for? From: RichM Date: 12 Aug 02 - 08:18 AM Politicians can be used effectively as garden stakes, to prop up your tomato plants or tall flowers. As they decay, they provide compost and fertilizer for the plants, since they are mostly BS.
Do your part for the environment! Re-cycle a politician today! Rich McCarthy |
|
Subject: RE: BS: what are politicians for? From: Bobert Date: 12 Aug 02 - 08:33 AM Now that's a thought... Bobert |
|
Subject: RE: BS: what are politicians for? From: Ringer Date: 12 Aug 02 - 01:48 PM I can't help thinking, Little Hawk, that your independent representatives elected to local councils which send representatives to regional assemblies which send representatives to a national parliament wouldn't stay party-free for very long. I think that, because people are people, groups would form, and these groups would soon coalesce into bigger groups and so on until soon, lo and behold, a two-party system had evolved. The parties almost certainly wouldn't be called Democrat and Republican, or Labour and Conservative, but they might, in your country, be called Francophone and Anglophone. You're never going to get perfect democracy, for all "Representation of the People" systems must adopt some compromise between workability and universal detailed consultation. The systems we have (severally) have been tried and tested over time, have been subjected to amendment and, in general, work: not perfectly, but adequately. The law of unintended consequences says that if you make constitutional changes then you get results that you haven't foreseen. If it ain't broke, then polish it a bit by all means, but don't fix it. One or two further thoughts: |
|
Subject: RE: BS: what are politicians for? From: Gareth Date: 12 Aug 02 - 06:56 PM Speaking as one who does his little best within the British/Welsh political circles, and as one who has qualified as an "Election Agent" there are times when I wonder why I am spending my time getting other **** elected. But I'll tell you why I do it. The purpose of power it to change things, Hopefully for the best. Sometimes we have to compromise. Sometimes we have to surrender. Very occasionally we win. But if you have a system reliant upon percieved democracy you are left little choice, Participate or let apathy rule. What choice is that. Gareth " And who was left to speak for me ". |
|
Subject: RE: BS: what are politicians for? From: Little Hawk Date: 12 Aug 02 - 07:07 PM Ringer - More likely a 3, 4, 5, or 6 party system would evolve. It did in Canada. Yes, there will always be factions...there were even under monarchies, and those factions worked hard to get the king or queen to see it their way. It's the official party apparatus that worries me. It's self-perpetuating and self-enlarging. It's just like: spirituality doesn't worry me a bit, but organized religions do. Same basic situation, but under a different label. - LH |
|
Subject: RE: BS: what are politicians for? From: Wolfgang Date: 20 Aug 02 - 08:49 AM The same question has been asked in song form by Austrian Georg Kreisler (the German language Tom Lehrer): Was für ein Ticker ist ein Politiker (What kind of tician is a politician?) Wolfgang |
|
Subject: RE: BS: what are politicians for? From: Mr Happy Date: 21 Aug 02 - 10:44 AM wolf, thanks, any chance of full tranlated version? |
|
Subject: RE: BS: what are politicians for? From: GUEST,Al Date: 21 Aug 02 - 10:54 AM what are politicians for? 1.Lying 2.Cheating 3.Stealing 4.Crusading Al |
|
Subject: RE: BS: what are politicians for? From: sian, west wales Date: 21 Aug 02 - 11:26 AM There seems to be an assumption here that we are all in favour of a democracy elected on a one-person-one-vote, first-past-the-post system. Britain used a version of Proportional Representation when it elected its new regional assemblies and I personally think that we've got a much better National Assembly for Wales than we would have had otherwise. (Gareth may disagree, of course. Freedom of speech, and all that.) And, also personally, although I would prefer to see no party politics at town and community council level, I feel safer having them at every other level - largely because 'independent' council, AM, MP, MEP candidates don't have published manifestos to which I can point when they do something completely doo-lal. Oh, and I'm pretty sure that Mr. H is wrong about the exclusion thing. I know of a child here who has been refused a place this coming term in his usual school, and the parents have to either find a school which will accept him (including one for behaviourally-challenged children) or sign up with the Education Authority for home schooling. If the kid still ends up hanging around street corners, it's a matter of truancy, the same as if he were bunking 'proper' school. But the bottom line is that the Authority or its agents (schools) have a legal responsibility to provide tuition. sian |
|
Subject: RE: BS: what are politicians for? From: Wolfgang Date: 21 Aug 02 - 11:31 AM Here you go. I had to invent some words (explanations in parentheses) to keep to the 'tician' of the original, but you'll get the idea. 'Ticker' cannot be translated, 'tician' is only a weak effort. We hear in that word also 'der tickt nicht richtig', meaning roughly 'he's off his rocker'. Wolfgang
Was für ein Ticker ist ein Politiker |
|
Subject: RE: BS: what are politicians for? From: Mr Happy Date: 21 Aug 02 - 08:49 PM sian w cymru, i'm not wrong- your experience of a kid excluded then included isn't unusual for mainstream, everyday families where the kid's still living in in the parental home. i've a nephew who fits your description. i'm talking about kids 'in the care of the local authority' where lip service is paid to their education. if you want more details pm me. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: what are politicians for? From: Mr Happy Date: 21 Aug 02 - 08:53 PM wolf, thanks/danke for the translation- i must have made some extra work for you there- but the words ring very/verlich true, domo arigato, choos, herr happy |
|
Subject: RE: BS: what are politicians for? From: John O'L Date: 22 Aug 02 - 02:17 AM Charles de Gaulle wrote - "In order to become the master, the politician poses as the servant." I suppose he should know. Glenn |
|
Subject: RE: BS: what are politicians for? From: sian, west wales Date: 22 Aug 02 - 04:51 AM I take your point, Mr. H. I would still imagine that the actual law requires Authorities to provide education regardless, but I've no doubt that, all too often, the same Authorities' Care Services are often derelict in their duty to provide the interface normally provided by parents. Which brings us back to politicians. Councillors should be the ones banging departmental heads together to make sure the interfaces happen, and they don't (very often). Too much like hard work, I suppose. sian |
|
Subject: RE: BS: what are politicians for? From: Little Hawk Date: 22 Aug 02 - 03:16 PM Good quote from De Gaulle... - LH |
|
Subject: RE: BS: what are politicians for? From: John O'L Date: 22 Aug 02 - 06:23 PM It puts a rather sinister spin on the notion that we elect representatives to speak and act for us, doesn't it? |
|
Subject: RE: BS: what are politicians for? From: Little Hawk Date: 23 Aug 02 - 01:42 AM Well, the powers that be don't really give us a choice, do they? We either vote for the guys that they handpick in the first place...or we don't vote and those guys get elected anyway by the people who do vote. Consider this: How will a guy without backing by a major party get enough funding to run a successful campaign? He won't. How will a person who truly represents the public get backing from a major party? He won't. It's a closed shop, folks... NEWSFLASH!!! Canada's very own king-for-life (or so it seemed), Jean Chretien, 'as just announce dat 'e will be stePPING down in oh, may-BE 18 months from now! Dat's right, brudder, 18 months. 'E could 'ave step down in may-BE t'ree or four months like dey usually do in dis con-TREE, but 'e just didn' want to leave dat bad, and be-SIDES, 'e t'ought dat da con-TREE need 'im for may-BE a little while more till 'e fix everyt'ing up REAL good 'ere and leave us all a legaCY to be proud OF. So...you got da little guy from Shawinigan for 18 more months! Enjoy, enjoy... Strangely 'e don' get along too well wit' George Bush. I tink dat is mayBE beCAUSE George Bush tink dat 'e is a "liberal" and 'e don' trust 'im! George Bush probably don' know dat it's just da party dat is CALLED "Liberal Party of Canada" but dat don' mean dey don' like BEEG BUSINESS, by GOSH! Big Business put dem fellas where dey are TO-day and don' you forget IT! - LH |
|
Subject: RE: BS: what are politicians for? From: Mr Happy Date: 23 Aug 02 - 03:06 AM glen2glen: "It puts a rather sinister spin on the notion that we elect representatives to speak and act for us, doesn't it?" glen, i think you hit one of the coffin nails right on the head there. there's an institution in all political states[countries]known as the 'establishment'. its the status quo default standard yardstick of politics/politicians. i've experience of a local[to me]labour councillor who served his congregation well & fairly to the best of his ability- a thoroughly decent chap. he stood as mp one year & was elected to parliament. there[its reported],he came up against the national 'party line' & also the very powerful 'establishment'. he wasn't able to input the same kind of help to his electors as before[doesn't mean he was weak]because of the constant barriers set up by these all powerful groups.after much effort in mustering like minded support of fellow mps of all political shades, the poor man had a breakdown & had to retire his career. he returned to the local scene & after convalescence, returned to continue to uphold the interests of the people, albeit in a part time role, as a city councillor. a conclusion,its not just politicians to blame for the shitty state/condition most world citizens find themselves in, there's other variables to consider. your thoughts/comments?
|
|
Subject: RE: BS: what are politicians for? From: Bobert Date: 23 Aug 02 - 09:28 AM Well, I'm sure there will be a long line of folks waiting to tell me just how wrong my Boney Wst Ginny but is but, heck, what's new? Now I'd like to think that at some point in time that Junior Bush Laden will not be able to keep the American people entertained with his little wars and that the theft of the 2000 election rises back to the top for a second looksie. Hmmmmm? Might that be just enough to get folks thinking about changing the manner in which leaders are selected. Mix in the corporate scandals and, wah laa, some interesting stuff. Junior knows this and is running scared looking for folks to blow up to keep the truth buried... Now, throw in a 5% Green vote in the 2004 Presidsential election and now, for the first time ever, the progressives will have a voice and some credibility and will get campaine money just like the Repubocrats. Nore importantly, they'll be included in the Presidential debates and tthe Repubocrats will then look so much like the one party that they are... Hey, no goals,no progress. 5% is all it's gonna take to make the first step toward real democracy. 5%! Bobert |
|
Subject: RE: BS: what are politicians for? From: Little Hawk Date: 23 Aug 02 - 11:14 AM I call 'em the "Democrapublicants", Bobert! You are quite right that it is in fact a one-party system, masquerading as two, and at what an expense! I wish the Green Party all the best in putting a small crack in their facade of democracy. - LH |
|
Subject: RE: BS: what are politicians for? From: GUEST,Ken Voller Date: 24 Oct 03 - 10:27 PM Politics is the second oldest profession, but it has remarkable resmblance to the first.Who is in the whorehouse now???. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: what are politicians for? From: LadyJean Date: 24 Oct 03 - 10:51 PM Politicians are for recycling ethnic jokes. I know a great Newfie joke. I tell it about George and Jeb Bush. Right! I belong to the Society for Creative Anachronism. It is not, and never has been a democracy. Almost no officers are elected. Most are appointed by their predecessors. Abuse of authority is accepted. People look at you askance if you complain. The head of a local group is responsible only to the head of the regional group. We had a woman in charge of the local chapter who conducted little star chamber courts. What stopped her, in the end was an election. We do elect our baron and or baroness. They have no real power, at least not in my barony, but candidates are nominated, and elected. Our star chamber lady didn't even get a nomination. She went away. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: what are politicians for? From: Mark Clark Date: 24 Oct 03 - 11:59 PM The great thinker, teacher and design engineer R. Buckminster Fuller liked to say that “…provided that all the sources of energy are maintained, all the world's politicians could be placed in a rocket and sent into the sun and no human condition would be worsened.” Some days I'd sure like to test his theory. - Mark |
