Mr. Mojo

<a target=new href="http://slate.msn.com/id/2088324/"><b>SLATE - Pious Bias
Lies and the lying liars who attribute them to the other party - LINKY</b></a> By William Saletan


I have a message for my liberal friends, relatives, and colleagues: If you think Republicans play dirty and Democrats don't, open your other eye.

I've been hearing this complaint everywhere I go. It seems to be the emerging centerpiece of the Democratic campaign message in 2004. Exhibit A is George W. Bush's victory in the court fight over the 2000 Florida recount. Exhibit B is the ongoing attempt by the Republican governor and Republican legislature of Texas to redraw that state's congressional districts. Exhibit C is the recall of Gov. Gray Davis, D-Calif.

The complaints are spreading and becoming more shrill. At last Tuesday's debate among the Democratic presidential candidates, Carol Moseley Braun said Bush "was not elected by the American people." Al Sharpton added, "We are witnessing a nonmilitary civil war. It started with the recount in Florida, it went to the redistricting in Texas, now it's the [recall] in California. … It's a rejection of the American people."

On Saturday, at a Democratic steak fry in Iowa, several presidential candidates stood behind Sen. Tom Harkin, D-Iowa, as he charged, "Bush stole the election. … We know what the Republican strategy is: suppress the vote. … Look what they did in Florida. Look what they're trying to do in Texas. Look what they're trying to do in California." Former President Bill Clinton told the crowd that in 2000, five justices of the Supreme Court "thought it was time for the minority to have the White House, they stopped counting votes in Florida, and they just gave it to them." Clinton said Republicans "believe in government by ideology, enemies, and attack. We believe in government by experiment, evidence, and argument."

Really? Let's look at the record.

<b>In Florida, Al Gore originally asked for a recount only in counties in which he thought Democrats would gain votes.</b>Moreover, to be precise, he wasn't for "counting" more ballots; he was for reinterpreting already-counted ballots until he came out ahead. Gore's lawyer, David Boies, argued that ballots should be interpreted as votes for Bush or Gore based on "the intent of the voter, not how the voter manifests his or her intent"—in other words, without rules. Rep. Ed Markey, D-Mass., a Gore surrogate, actually claimed, "The punch cards were wrong." Gore eventually moderated his position, but not until he had to.

In Texas, Republicans seeking to redraw congressional districts in the third year of the decade are violating custom but not law. On Friday, a panel of federal judges dismissed a lawsuit by Democrats claiming that the GOP's redistricting tactics violated the Voting Rights Act. As for the 11 Democratic state senators who fled to New Mexico to prevent the majority from gathering a quorum, I can only imagine the cries of outrage I'd be hearing from my liberal friends if those were Republicans thwarting a Democratic legislature.

Many Democrats have questioned Bush's legitimacy because he lost the nationwide popular vote. It doesn't seem to bother them that this principle—the right of the majority to get like-minded representation, regardless of which party wins jurisdiction by jurisdiction—is exactly the principle they deny in Texas. Gore lost the Electoral College while winning a 48 percent plurality of the vote nationwide. Texas Republicans lost a majority of the state's congressional seats in 2002 while winning 56 percent of the vote statewide.

In California, the recall process is authorized by the state constitution. More than 1.3 million California voters signed petitions calling for this recall. Maybe that's because Davis got a lower percentage of the vote statewide in 2002 than Bush got nationwide in 2000. Or maybe it's because 63 percent of likely California voters disapprove of Davis' performance in office (down from 72 percent in August). And before you complain about Republicans using sneaky tactics to oust an honestly elected governor, let's hear your defense of the $7 million Davis spent in last year's Republican gubernatorial primary to deprive general-election voters of a moderate Republican alternative.

Are Republicans nasty? Do they refuse to accept election defeats? Do they subvert respect for democracy? If so, they have no monopoly on these vices. They aren't the ones claiming that our current president "was not elected by the American people." They aren't the ones declaring "a nonmilitary civil war." And it was Clinton, not a Republican former president, who asserted at the Iowa steak fry that the other party "tried to put more arsenic in the water."

A day after Clinton leveled that charge, ABC's This Week aired a delicious exchange between George Stephanopoulos and Howard Dean aboard a Dean campaign van. Stephanopoulos asked Dean whether it was true, as rival candidate Dick Gephardt alleged, that Dean had supported $270 billion in Medicare cuts advocated by Newt Gingrich in 1995. Dean said it was "very unlikely." Then Stephanopoulos showed Dean newspaper clips backing up the allegation. "It's pretty clear that you said you would accept a 7 to 10 percent cut in the rate of growth of Medicare," said Stephanopoulos. "Oh!" Dean interjected, raising his eyebrows. "Cutting the rate of growth! That's much different."

Excuse me, but wasn't that difference exactly what Clinton deliberately blurred in his 1996 campaign? Didn't he beat Bob Dole by accusing Dole and Gingrich of cutting Medicare?

I'm not excusing the games Republicans play. But by projecting all evil onto Republicans, Democrats spread the same political disease: the notion that you don't have to be wary of lying or cheating unless the other side is doing it. Lying and cheating don't belong to Republicans or Democrats. We're all susceptible, and we're all guilty.

Sure, some people are more guilty than others. But if that's your obsession, I commend to you the words of my colleague, Jack Shafer: If you're interested in which wing lies more, you're probably not very interested in the truth.

__________________
When I jerk off I feel good for about twenty seconds and then WHAM it's right back into suicidal depression

lurkette

Yeah, anybody who thinks one party or the other has a monopoly on sleazy, dishonest, underhanded behavior is hopelessly naive or willfully blind.

__________________
"If ten million people believe a foolish thing, it is still a foolish thing."

- Anatole France

Sparhawk

The problem with these sort of editorials is it starts a tit-for-tat game in which no one wins and everyone looks rather shrill in the end.

My problem with the re-districting is the impact it's going to have on the rest of the 50 states. Should the states with Democratic legislatures now feel free to squeeze out Republican seats? Once the Democratic legislatures do it, the Republicans will do it right back, and we'll have wasted years of worthwhile work these men and women could have been doing, the end result being no significant change.

We elected our state representatives to work for us, not for Terry McAuliffe and Karl Rove.

__________________
"In Iraq, no doubt about it, it's tough. It's hard work. It's incredibly hard. It's - and it's hard work. I understand how hard it is. I get the casualty reports every day. I see on the TV screens how hard it is. But it's necessary work. We're making progress. It is hard work."

Superbelt

So much wrong in that article (issuewise). It's right in-so-much as we both play dirty.

I have issues with the specifics, like Florida, Texas and California. And I will get into them later tonight.

seretogis

I couldn't have said it better, so I won't!

__________________
seretogis - sieg heil
perfect little dream the kind that hurts the most, forgot how it feels well almost
no one to blame always the same, open my eyes wake up in flames

SkanK0r

Note the references to Al Franken's book. I don't want to hijack the thread and take it off course, but I read that book, and I can vouch for the fact that it is, indeed, very partisan. He does, unfortunately, paint the democrats and infallible figures by not really doing in to depth about all the terrible things they do. Granted, his book wasn't supposed to be an equal-opportunity slam - it was INTENDED as a partisan slam. You just gotta keep that in mind when you read it - or anything else for that matter.

seretogis

However, every major media source absolutely refuses to admit any sort of political bias, though nearly all of them are guilty of it. The Star Tribune in MN is ridiculously liberal-slanted, and was recognized as such by the NYTimes iirc, but still claims to be objective.

__________________
seretogis - sieg heil
perfect little dream the kind that hurts the most, forgot how it feels well almost
no one to blame always the same, open my eyes wake up in flames

SkanK0r

And that goes along with what's REALLY wrong with everything - no one admits to their mistakes, and thus no one learns from them. People and organizations no longer care about self-improvement. It's all about discrediting the other guy, or proving him wrong.

Superbelt

Florida:
I'll keep this short since its been run in the ground. The Florida ballot thing is an obvious case of corruption. The whole rant he does on it excludes the facts that tens of thousands of black voters were wrongfully excluded from the voting rolls and that the company that excluded them eventually admitted to as much. Gore, if he got the statewide recount, which is what he fought for in the SCOTUS, would have won the state.

Texas Gerrymandering:
Texas Republicans tried to ram through gerrymandering, and the Dems eventually fought it, and defeated it with several fence sitting republicans. So they tried again several months later only this time by removing a rule that defeated the bill the first time. IT WAS DEFEATED. So the Senators left after the Majority Republicans had to squash the democrats voting rights to ram their legislation through. The gerrymandering will not hold up in court.

Also, The republicans say "It doesn't seem to bother them that this principle—the right of the majority to get like-minded representation, regardless of which party wins jurisdiction by jurisdiction—is exactly the principle they deny in Texas. Gore lost the Electoral College while winning a 48 percent plurality of the vote nationwide. Texas Republicans lost a majority of the state's congressional seats in 2002 while winning 56 percent of the vote statewide. "
He, and the Texas Republicans fail to realize that not everyone in this nation votes straight party line. You can vote for a Republican president and still vote for a Democrat or independent congressman. Americans have the freedom and intelligence to vote like that. Maybe if the republicans ran better campaigns down there they might be able to elect their own congressmen.

California Recall:
1.3 million PEOPLE signed a petition to recall Gray Davis. Not voters. The signers were just people walking out of Wal-Mart's and supermarkets and door to door solicitations. Not voters. I would bet 30% or less of the people who signed the recall petition actually voted for or against Gray. Also what about the rights of the people who DID elect Gray?
3,469,025 VOTERS, or 47.4% of those who voted, elected Gray.
There are 34 million people in California
0.038% of californians voted to get Gray out.
So this small minority of people who I am sure most of which were too lazy to actually vote in the election were able to subvert the will of the people who actually took the time to get out and vote for a governor. The saying goes. "If you don't vote you can't complain."

Anyway I just wanted to address those things.... Carry on.

prb

Read the article in Slate, "Does the GOP Subvert Democracy?"
http:/slate.msn.com/id/2087297/

If you think the Dems are playing dirty, I have a question: Which party started it and which party should be expected to stop first?

SkanK0r

Here's the answer: doesn't matter. They BOTH need to stop it. The problem lies in one side growing the balls to do it. If both sides have been playing dirty for such a long time, it's hard for one to just stop - because then the other side will tear them to shreds, as they are continuing to utilize dirty tactics.

That's a different debate, though. But I want to emphasize that your question isn't important.

(err, I hope this didn't come off heavy-handed. not how I intended it)

cynic

The democrats are not liberals. They offer the only political alternitve to conservatism and we all know who well republicans have served alabama and the splendid job they are doing in power now.

A third party is a wasted vote.

Lebell

Interesting.

I didn't know Gray Davis didn't even have a simple majority to get elected.

__________________
"Of all tyrannies, a tyranny exercised for the good of its victims may be the most oppressive. It may be better to live under robber barons than under omnipotent moral busybodies. The robber baron's cruelty may sometimes sleep, his cupidity may at some point be satiated; but those who torment us for our own good will torment us without end, for they do so with the approval of their own conscience." – C. S. Lewis

The ONLY sponsors we have are YOU!

Please Donate!

seretogis

I just had a flashback to my early childhood.

__________________
seretogis - sieg heil
perfect little dream the kind that hurts the most, forgot how it feels well almost
no one to blame always the same, open my eyes wake up in flames

Superbelt

He was running against 5 people. And California has a strong green party. That does tend to keep the percentages down.

Mr. Mojo

<I>Florida:
The whole rant he does on it excludes the facts that tens of thousands of black voters were wrongfully excluded from the voting rolls and that the company that excluded them eventually admitted to as much. </I>

<b>* <a target=new href="http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-srv/onpolitics/elections2000/recount/front.htm">Study: Black Votes Affected Most (LINK)</a></b> "Black precincts had a heavy concentration of overvotes that were rejected by counting machines on election day. White precincts using the same technology – Votomatic punch cards – had a different pattern of errors: They had a higher rate of incomplete punches such as dimples or "hanging chads."

So who's fault is it that the votes were rejected? The Voters.
You didn’t say anything about all the Absentee Ballots that Gore had tossed out because of the Military's Postal System.

_______________________________________________

<I>Gore, if he got the statewide recount, which is what he fought for in the SCOTUS, would have won the state.</I>

<b>*<a target=new href="http://www.cnn.com/SPECIALS/2001/florida.ballots/stories/main.html">Florida recount study: Bush still wins (LINK)</a></b> "A comprehensive study of the 2000 presidential election in Florida suggests that if the U.S. Supreme Court had allowed a statewide vote recount to proceed, Republican candidate George W. Bush would still have been elected president."

_______________________________________________

<b>*</b> I know nothing about what is going in Texas

________________________________________________
<I>California Recall:
1.3 million PEOPLE signed a petition to recall Gray Davis. Not voters.</I>

<b>*<a target=new href="http://216.239.51.104/search?q=cache:vXwBpMo3o8IJ:recallwatch.lobbyingcentral.com/prorecallpetition.pdf+registered+voters+petition+to+recall+Gray+Davis+&hl=en&ie=UTF-8">Recall Petition Instruction Sheet (LINK)</a></b> "All signatures on a petition must be by REGISTERED VOTERS of the SAME County that is designated on the petition."


I dunno if you ever worked a political petition drive, I have (they suck more than words allow), the very first question you ask: "Are you a registered voter?"

<I>So this small minority of people who I am sure most of which were too lazy to actually vote in the election were able to subvert the will of the people who actually took the time to get out and vote for a governor.</I>

<b>*</b> Its in the States constituion to allow the people to TRY a recall. I'm sure there was a recall drive against Reagan (twice) and Pete Wilson. So this recall is nothing new. It just a 'outrage' because it against a democrat.

__________________
When I jerk off I feel good for about twenty seconds and then WHAM it's right back into suicidal depression

prb

SkanCOr: My question was the natural question to be asked : If politics is played as a dirty little game, how do we get the politicians to stop playing dirty? If the dems tried to elevate the debate they would get bitch-slapped by Karl Rove at every turn - - - so where's the incentive? That the public would take notice and reward democratic candidates with their votes? Ain't gonna happen and you and I know it. Most people who vote aren't as informed as those who post in this forum.
I look at the tenor of political debate today and I know who I blame for it. I notice it was the Republicans who started calling the Dems a bunch of traitors, family-destroying libertines, lazy welfare cheats, baby-killers, etc. ( I don't have Newt's list in front of me and can't remember them all). And I don't see the media equivalents of Rush Limbaugh, Joe Scarborough, G. Gordon Liddy, Sean Hannitty, Dr. Laura, The Dark Avenger, Tony Snow, O'Reilly, Coulter and all the others too numerous to mention.

It's ugly, I agree, but I know who made it that way.

Republicans Repent!

Superbelt

I'm not talking about the overpunches and hanging chads and crap like that.
The black voters weren't at fault. Tens of thousands of them were NOT ALLOWED TO VOTE AT ALL. They were told to go home because of a false criminal record that was set up in a shoddy felon list that only looked for key identifiers like last names and they excluded many with that last name that never commiteed a crime. I think it was about 90,000 wrongfully excluded predominantley black and democrat people.


Not all registered voters vote. A big percentage don't. I think about 27 million californians are eligible/registered to vote and only 7mill actually did.

JBX

Nice couple of posts Mr. Mojo.

__________________
"Youth and Strength is no match for Age and Treachery"

Mr. Mojo

<B>*<a target=new href="http://civic.net/civic-values.archive/200107/msg00060.html">Florida's black voter turnout grossly overstated (LINK)</a></b>
"Contrary to all reports, black voters on Nov. 7 constituted 10 percent of Florida's turnout -- 610,616 by actual count, as opposed to estimates that routinely top 900,000"


<b>*<a target=new href="http://www.manhattan-institute.org/html/dissenting_report_press_releas.htm">Dissenting Report On Florida Finds NO Discrimination (LINK)</a></b>
" Dr. Abigail Thernstrom, a member of the U.S. Commission on Civil Rights, testified today before the Senate Rules Committee that the Commission’s majority report on the 2000 Florida election used flawed data to justify its preconceived, partisan belief that the election was marred by discrimination and disfranchisement of minority voters. A more rigorous statistical analysis of the Florida voting data found that the race of voters in recent Florida elections was statistically unrelated to the rate of ballot spoilage."

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------

<i>Not all registered voters vote. A big percentage don't. I think about 27 million californians are eligible/registered to vote and only 7mill actually did. </i>

<b>*</b>So if only 7 million voted and 1 Million signed the petition for the recall the percentage is...

__________________
When I jerk off I feel good for about twenty seconds and then WHAM it's right back into suicidal depression

Conclamo Ludus

The left sucks and the right blows, if you stand inbetween them, the sensation is quite pleasent, refreshing even.

__________________
Lord, have mercy on my wicked soul
I wouldn't mistreat you baby, for my weight in gold.
-Son House, Death Letter Blues

Superbelt

See you are sidestepping voter roll purges. Type "Florida 2000 Voter Roll Purge" into google and read up a bit.

And in Cali it is still a majority of motivated voters being overturned by people aproached by a person getting paid to produce names, and that being only a fraction of what put him in office.

Conclamo Ludus

Its still part of democracy, and part of the law. Its playing within the rules of the game. They should've changed the law a long time ago if it really screws the voters. Its not like there isn't going to be another election. If all those voters that are getting screwed show up to vote, than this minority of people chasing Davis out will be shut out again. If people truly don't want him out, than Davis will stay, so what's the worry?

__________________
Lord, have mercy on my wicked soul
I wouldn't mistreat you baby, for my weight in gold.
-Son House, Death Letter Blues

Superbelt

The worry is that it is going to cost California alot of money to hold this election. Money the state doesn't have to spare to have this special election.

Conclamo Ludus

Well when the election comes, we'll find out the will of the people, which is priceless.

__________________
Lord, have mercy on my wicked soul
I wouldn't mistreat you baby, for my weight in gold.
-Son House, Death Letter Blues

rgr22j

For it being run into the ground, I'm surprised you didn't know that the major media statewide recount (New York Times, Washington Post, LA Times, Wall Street Journal, and Miami Herald) performed by academics showed that Bush would have won in every situation except the most egregious (count even minor indentions) which the Florida Supreme Court, all Democrats, struck down. Of the newspapers, the Washington Post might be called moderate, and the Wall Street Journal definitely conservative. The other three are liberal. More, it was executed by academics, which are overwhelmingly liberal. If anything, the bias here would be liberal.

Voter roll purge? If they had this "felon list" with only last names on it, wouldn't some of those voters purged also be white?

Let's think about numbers here. There are roughly 1.8 million eligible black voters in Florida, according to the 2001 census. This is assuming that blacks have the same age demographics as whites, 22.8% under the age of 18, which they don't (the black population is younger, all those older wealthy retirees are usually white). Florida has a 65% registration rate, so let's say 1.2 million registered black voters. 600k actually voted, so we have 600k left. Using optimistic numbers, you're saying that roughly 1 in 6 registered black voters who didn't vote were purged/turned away/persecuted. Not possible.

Other than Jesse Jackson there is virtually no evidence that "tens of thousands" of black voters were wrongfully excluded. There's about as much evidence there as there is that the western panhandle or military voters would have handed the state to Bush were it not for those "evil dirty" Democrats.

There's a big difference -- the "lines" set down by the Electoral College never change, and the Electoral College itself is mandated by the Constitution. Gerrymandering is technically not illegal (but should be). There's a Supreme Court Case in 1962 (Baker v. Carr?) that could be used to strike it down, however. Ironic, as the most recent gerrymander to that point was the Democrat gerrymandering of 1957 and 1959.

That doesn't make gerrymandering right, however, and I hope once and for all either a federal law sets a consistent standard or that DeLay gets smacked down so hard neither party will even consider the idea of drawing lines on anything other than geography. Both parties look stupid; I don't know which is worse, due to the ridiculous portrait of Democrats hightailing it to Oklahoma or New Mexico and not doing their jobs, or DeLay trying to get Homeland Security to bring them back.

See Mr. Mojo.

-- Alvin

smooth

The worry is the cost of the election and the political fallout resulting from pundits and various people eyeing our affairs and laying the nation's problems at the feet of left-wing conspiracists operating out of the 9th Circuit.

BTW, here's the actual charge levied against Davis in the ballot I received today:

Proponent's Statement of Reasons

To the Honorable Gray Davis: Persuant to Section 11020, California Election Code, the undersigned registered qualified voters of the State of California, hereby give notice that we are the proponenets of a recall petition and that we intend to seek your recall and removal from the office of Governor of the State of California, and to demand election of a successor in that office. The grounds for the recall are as follows: Gross mismanagement of California Finances by overspending taxpayers' money, threatening pubic safety by cutting funds to local governments, failing to account for the exorbitant cost of the energy fiasco, and failing in general to deal with the state's major problems until they get to the crisis stage. California should not be known as the state with poor schools, traffic jams, outrageous utility bills, and huge debts...all caused by gross mismanagement.

[emphasis original]

Does anyone else think this statement is ludicrous? I mean, it's not so much that I disagree but that some of the statements have no relation to Davis' actions and others seem to be problems every single state as well as the nation, as a whole, are experiencing. The last part, besides personifying California's lifestyle of at least three decades, doesn't even hinge on the governor's responsibilities.

Superbelt

It wasn't just the last names. It took several factors into consideration, I think it went off a percentage of similarities, something like that, that got the names on the felon list. Some on the list were white, some were republicans. But about 85% or so were black democrats.

smooth

Yes, in fact the link provided states:

This quote argues that the disproportion is occuring as a result of inequalities in the judicial system--not due to willful misconduct on the part of the people purging the list. It doesn't, however, conclude that black voters weren't disproportionately turned away as compared to the entire voter pool in Florida--just that the list purgers didn't do it along racial lines. I'll concede that it's a convaluted argument and I'll merely comment that Dr. John Lott has a questionable reputation in other endeavors.

Both white and black voters were turned away. Are we debating whether black voters would have voted Democrat versus white voters? Or are we debating that voters of all races were illegally excluded from voting?

The question ought to be whether both those white and black voters were registered Democrats.

My understanding was that Democrats were disproportionately purged from the list and that the seperate issue of whether minority voters' ballots were recounted differently than non-minority voters is being mistakenly mixed.

2wolves

Given the choice between giving our country to the corporations or having a president who gets some illicit head, I have to go with head every freaking time.

I sincerely wish, and am working towards, G. W. Bush's policies (aka Karl Rove and the nutzo neo-con's) getting an unpeeled pineapple enema.


Keep your god out of my government.

2Wolves

rgr22j

I'm not sure that would prove any wrongdoing, as criminals (both petty and major) overwhelmingly vote Democrat. Before I go further let me state that this is in no way an indictment of Democrats, just that in the past Democrats were more sympathetic towards due process, civil rights, and the protection of innocents from police wrongdoing. Sometimes it goes too far, sure, but in general I don't think it is an unfair statement to say. The point remains, if more Democrats were purged from the list of criminals, it doesn't necessarily prove racial discrimination. Neither does it prove that Democrats are criminals, or Democrats like criminals, or whatever link you might try to dream up between Democrats and criminals. Actually, I take that back. It's true, all Democrats are criminals. So are all Republicans!

To me, it's identical to delaying absentee ballots from overseas military would hurt Republicans more than Democrats, as would discouraging residents of the western panhandle by prematurely announcing elections results. Same effect -- registered, legal voters were prevented from voting. It's tragic, but purely political, not racial. In fact, one could make the argument that accidentally purging a registered voter who shared the same name as a felon is less terrible than willfully targeting registered military personnel and trying to deny their right to vote.

-- Alvin

rgr22j

I'm baffled about this constant misconception about corporations. Before 1994, when the Democrats controlled the House, they received the majority of contributions from business/corporate interests (note: not corporations, PACs). After 1994, this trend reversed. (opensecrets.org)

Corporate campaign contributions to Democrats hit a high in 1998 (55% of all contributions), leveled off in 2000, (50%), and swung to the Republicans in 2002.

The simple answer is that corporations give to whichever party is in power. They don't care for Democrat or Republican, just whoever can swing some policy their way. Of course, there are certain sectors that heavily contribute one way or another. Oil/energy largely to Republicans, entertainment (like the RIAA) and law firms to Democrats. Academia donates overwhelmingly to Democrats, as does 90% of organized labor.

What you probably already know is that Republicans raise a significant amount of more cash than Democrats. However, 92% of donations over $1,000,000 went to Democrats. But for every 2 people that donate to Democrats, 3 donate to Republicans. Republicans completely dominate the Democrats amongst people donating less than a few hundred dollars. Ironically, looking at it in this light, the Democrat is a politician who got a whole ton of cash from a few wealthy donors, while the Republican is one who got a whole lot of small donations from a whole lot of people. Reversed, isn't it?

By the way, where are you conservatives? I'm not the one who should be defending Republicans here... I'm not the one who voted for Bush, after all.

-- Alvin

EDIT: Argh, pressed "submit" too soon!

2wolves

rgr,

I don't believe I stated a Democrat or Republican position. Quite Independent in my opinion.

I don't believe in the person-hood of corporations. I'd dearly like to see CEO's and CFO's held personally liable for what their products cause.

Money is not "Free Speach" as money is never free.

2Wolves

Crazboos

I have my own opinion on all of the above.

The thing that gets me is that there are a lot of "I feels", "I thinks", and other opinionated responses blamming Bush and the Reps for what has happened in the above issues. Never have I seen a credible link backing up the points of the "facts" presented against the Reps. I have only seen credible links from Mr. Mojo and rgr22j. To repeat - I would like to see credible links from the people who are against President Bush and the Reps and not just their personal opinions.

__________________
There's nothing like freezing time with the flash of a bulb.

almostaugust

Yeah, your right on the mark here. Politicians become careerists, only interested in discrediting the other dude. Most of the time they just behave like schoolchildren. Its refreshing to see a poli that gives a shit about something and makes a stand.
One thing ive noticed about Americans, as opposed to the rest of the western world, is a sincere belief that your politicians are there for your best interests, and are possibly good people too. I think this is both bad and a good thing. In Britain and Australia we are so cynical- nobody loves our Prime Minister in the same romanticised spirit that the US seems to love its President. We could never ever have an Air Force 1 type film where our Prime Minister is the hero and saves the world and fistfights the bad guys. This is completely inconcievable. On the one hand i like the idea of plebs feeling so nobly represented that it moves them deeply; but then again some healthy criticism of the top dogs is also a good thing. I do know for sure that if our prime Minister used the evocative emotive psudo-biblical referances in his speeches that ive heard GW using, we would keel over laughing. But as i said, i can see this as both a good and bad thing.

mystmarimatt

it all goes back to the concept of how one comes to power in a politics, coming across someone who "actually gives a shit and makes a stand about something" is rare only because of the concessions one must make in order to come to power in the first place, if they take too strong a stand on something, it can often mean political suicide, they all become deadlocked, it's a horrid system.

which is why, i was wondering the other day, what if we made political offices mandatory for folks, not just voters, everyone, basically like jury duty. the pragmatist in me, who sadly is so often right says, it would probably just fail miserably and people would just be pissed off, no one would care, and things would never get done. but the idealist in me wonders if it might instill people with a sense of social responsibility and foster a love of government, and they would really try to make a difference, no more of this ageless battle between people so tied up they can barely tell the grass from the trees, who CAN'T get things done.

i dunno, maybe i'm talking out of my ass, but my friends and i thought it was a cool idea to throw around.

__________________
Words of Wisdom:

If you could really get to know someone and know that they weren't lying to you, then you would know the world was real. Because you could agree on things, you could compare notes. That must be why people get married or make Art. So they'll be able to really know something and not go insane.

MSD

Conservatives lie, Liberals lie, Centrists lie, it's all a matter of who can get the most lies out there, how many people will believe them, and how much they will be helped by the lies. Seeing as the White House, Senate, and House of Reps. are all controlled by Republicans/conservatives, they're going to be the ones who get the lies out there and noticed the most at this point in time. I'm sure that if Liberals controlled all three, they would be doing exactly the same thing. What we have to do is to be aware of what is going on, and not be afraid to point out lies and throw them back at politicians when they try to shovel BS down our throats.