Tilted Forum Project Discussion Community - View Single Post

pan6467 · 02-26-2010, 09:21 AM

I understand the debate about referendums, but once used and the voters have spoken it should be done and over with.

I believe in the people's voice and believe that people should have more voice and politicians less. Giving politicians more voice allows more corruption, especially with the latest Supreme Court ruling. Money is everything in politics and the people mean nothing.

It is for that reason I find this appalling. Again, I am a smoker (soon to be using Chantix again to quit... it's really fucking with my Sarcoidosis) and I dislike having to go outside and freeze to smoke but I live with it, because the people have spoken.

Once government allows a referendum like this, they should put forth another choice for the people. Let the people decide if they want to allow licenses.

I think a major part of the problems in this country is that we do not allow people more power through voting. I find people who want to give government more control and the people less voice are those who either believe they are far more educated and well versed than the general populace and look down on average people as lazy, worthless, uneducated, not smart enough to vote for the laws. These are also people who believe that we should just keep electing the same corrupt parties over and over again because those people like being babysat and/or have agendas and like the control over people.

I believe the opposite. I believe the people should be given more of a voice and allowed to define their communities and states anyway (with the exception of civil rights) the majority sees fit. I don't believe you'd have as many problems financially or with corruption of politicians.

There is no doubt in my mind that all this smoking license bullshit comes Penn National and Dan Gilbert getting ready for their casinos. And it is disgusting to me, to think that we give our voices to these politicians.

The argument can be made that we elect these people and can vote in new people if we do not like what they say. However, that is not the way it truly is. The 2 party system tells us exactly who the candidates will be, those candidates MUST pretty much stand the party line and not what is best for their district. Our system also demands that you need money to be elected. Thus Joe Schmo won't ever see a chance because the people in power already have the money and know how to get more (sell their votes).

When you take the people's votes away, it all becomes about the money and the people, as shown clearly in this case don't matter.

The ONLY way to remedy that, give the people more say and the politicians less.

02-26-2010, 09:21 AM	#17 (permalink)
pan6467 Lennonite Priest Location: Mansfield, Ohio USA	I understand the debate about referendums, but once used and the voters have spoken it should be done and over with. I believe in the people's voice and believe that people should have more voice and politicians less. Giving politicians more voice allows more corruption, especially with the latest Supreme Court ruling. Money is everything in politics and the people mean nothing. It is for that reason I find this appalling. Again, I am a smoker (soon to be using Chantix again to quit... it's really fucking with my Sarcoidosis) and I dislike having to go outside and freeze to smoke but I live with it, because the people have spoken. Once government allows a referendum like this, they should put forth another choice for the people. Let the people decide if they want to allow licenses. I think a major part of the problems in this country is that we do not allow people more power through voting. I find people who want to give government more control and the people less voice are those who either believe they are far more educated and well versed than the general populace and look down on average people as lazy, worthless, uneducated, not smart enough to vote for the laws. These are also people who believe that we should just keep electing the same corrupt parties over and over again because those people like being babysat and/or have agendas and like the control over people. I believe the opposite. I believe the people should be given more of a voice and allowed to define their communities and states anyway (with the exception of civil rights) the majority sees fit. I don't believe you'd have as many problems financially or with corruption of politicians. There is no doubt in my mind that all this smoking license bullshit comes Penn National and Dan Gilbert getting ready for their casinos. And it is disgusting to me, to think that we give our voices to these politicians. The argument can be made that we elect these people and can vote in new people if we do not like what they say. However, that is not the way it truly is. The 2 party system tells us exactly who the candidates will be, those candidates MUST pretty much stand the party line and not what is best for their district. Our system also demands that you need money to be elected. Thus Joe Schmo won't ever see a chance because the people in power already have the money and know how to get more (sell their votes). When you take the people's votes away, it all becomes about the money and the people, as shown clearly in this case don't matter. The ONLY way to remedy that, give the people more say and the politicians less. __________________ I just love people who use the excuse "I use/do this because I LOVE the feeling/joy/happiness it brings me" and expect you to be ok with that as you watch them destroy their life blindly following. My response is, "I like to put forks in an eletrical socket, just LOVE that feeling, can't ever get enough of it, so will you let me put this copper fork in that electric socket?"