How Does One Take Control of Congress and the USA?

[riverc0il]

like i said before, both major parties are knee deep in it. the only thing people can do is consider third party options because demanding change from these turkeys (repubs & demos) isn't gonna change anything. they can't even police themselves (see campaign finance legislation fiescos and how the rules further erode campaign races through groups like swift boat vets and moveon.org for each side respectively). personally, i think the ONLY thing that will save this country's political system is if people from the right AND left come together and agree on some basic elements of politics, the main item being the system is horrendously boated and influenced by money in almost every aspect.

 

[SkiDog]

If true this is no way to run a country and not the way our forefathers envisioned it.

Agreed, but could they have ever envisioned what we have today? remember they made the "rules" for this country when there were a LOT less people, oh yeah and don't forget PRE Industrial revolution. Those are HUGE factors...IMO..

enjoy!

M

 

[ctenidae]

As Churchill said, "Democracy is the worst way to govern a country, except for all the other ways that have been tried," or words to that effect.

 

[riverc0il]

Agreed, but could they have ever envisioned what we have today? remember they made the "rules" for this country when there were a LOT less people, oh yeah and don't forget PRE Industrial revolution. Those are HUGE factors...IMO..

the constitution was written intentionally vague due to the great number of interests and agendas that individual states and politicians had at the time. however, the cornerstone of what made the constitution was compromise and flexibility of wording. the ability to add amendments and understanding that things would not always be the same down the road. the important rules for this country have actually been decided mostly in the past 100 or so years, especially those regarding corporate regulation and other such big business and industry regulations which set the frameworks for the system we have today. a good film that provides some background on the subject is the corporation which was thoroughly depressing despite to me despite the fact that i knew most of the information containted within the documentary. not much information at the documentary's site, but here's the basis of what changed the precident regarding corporate regulation. what does that have to do with the buying of the Congress and the Capitol? everything because it is mostly the big money corporations that are wheeling and dealing and dining the politicians (some call it lobbying, what ever that actually means ).

ctenidae provides a great quote. churchill was right on about democracy, it is abosolutely the best worst form of government. but the buying of congress has more to do with our economic system than our political system. not to rail against capitolism, i don't think full on socialism is any better. but twentieth and twenty-first century United States styled capitolism is the culperate behind why our political system is broken. as i eluded to previously, the real problem isn't the right or left... it's the entire system. it's going to take people from both sides coming together and agreeing on this basic principle before things get better regardless of which party is currently greasing the wheels as they both are.

 

[Stephen]

I would dare say the depraved soul is the root of corruption. Anyone honest enough to not be corrupted would never win an election.

-Stephen

 

[BrockVond]

now enjoying and growin in democracy

not sure "enjoying" is the right word.

http://www.nytimes.com/2005/05/29/international/middleeast/29iraq.html?fta=y

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/south_asia/1740538.stm

http://today.reuters.co.uk/news/new...0908Z_01_MOL032190_RTRUKOC_0_AFGHAN-BLAST.xml

 

[SkiDog]

ctenidae provides a great quote. churchill was right on about democracy, it is abosolutely the best worst form of government. but the buying of congress has more to do with our economic system than our political system. not to rail against capitolism, i don't think full on socialism is any better. but twentieth and twenty-first century United States styled capitolism is the culperate behind why our political system is broken. as i eluded to previously, the real problem isn't the right or left... it's the entire system. it's going to take people from both sides coming together and agreeing on this basic principle before things get better regardless of which party is currently greasing the wheels as they both are.

I agree that both sides are "corrupt" and LOVE to butt heads with each other and until they are reformewd we have no chance at "happiness".

M

 

[ctenidae]

Personally, I think the real root cause lies with the electorate, not the elected. We're so tuned to commercialism that the only way to get through to the general public is to constantly bombard them with the same message, over and over. Remember, if you say something often enough, it becomes true. Massive ad campaigns are expensive,a dn are the only way to get the public's attention. Large corporations have the money and the know-how to get their pet candidate elected. Until the American people wake up a little and think for themselves, at least a little, rather than let whatever talking head is delivering the message of the day do it for them, we'll be stuck in the situation as it currently is.

You want to have some fun, get a rabid liberal/conservative/libertarian/anyone else who defines themselves or others with a single word going on a subject, then agree with them. Usually they can't discuss something unless they can use ad hominem attacks, whcih they can't do if you confuse them into thinking you agree with them.

 

[dmc]

Personally, I think the real root cause lies with the electorate, not the elected.

Whats really scarey to me is how organized the "religious right" is...
And GWB owes them....

There's going to be a social revolution soon.... Mark my words...

 

[ctenidae]

I hope you're right, dmc, really I do. Even if I don't agree with whatever its point will be, I hope you're right. At least it will show the American people are alive and thinking.

Maybe.

 

[JimG.]

I hope you're right, dmc, really I do. Even if I don't agree with whatever its point will be, I hope you're right. At least it will show the American people are alive and thinking.

Maybe.

Perhaps there will be, but it won't be initiated or followed through on by any of the major political groups (Democrats, Republicans, Independents, whatever). They're all too entrenched and invested in the current system.

No, a social revolution will not be started by those on the religious right or their opponents, those who support gay marriage. No, it won't be started by "pro-life" groups (whatever that means) or pro-abortion groups. Pro-business or pro-welfare groups will have no say.

No my friends, it will be started by what is still the largest and most powerful group in this country, the silent majority. Those who control the current political climate are going to be quite unhappy then!

 

[ctenidae]

Somebody grab a stick and poke the Silent Majority, see if they're still alive. At least, hold a mirror under their nose or something.

 

[riverc0il]

Until the American people wake up a little and think for themselves, at least a little, rather than let whatever talking head is delivering the message of the day do it for them, we'll be stuck in the situation as it currently is.

i maybe a little pessimistic regarding the human condition, but having studied human behavior in college and having been an astute observer my entire life, i wouldn't relay on humaninity realizing they need to think for themselves. how many times has literature warned as to think for ourselves, yet how few people actually do so? just the amazing amount of people on the fence over the last election is puzzlement enough. and i don't care which side people lined up on, but with issues that big, how could you possibly be undecided? part of the reason is the poor choice of potential elected officials. but i think the larger reason is most people do not think critically, search out and research issues, read up on articles, and make positive debates such as this one. most people are content to be spoon fed by their local TV news station which isn't providing real news. but rather they are simply regurgitating sound bytes and the politicians own words instead of investigating, probing, asking questions, and doing objective critical analysis. this happens occasionally in the news media, but generally not on your local TV news or newspapers where most people are getting their info. no wonder they are undecided, they just keep getting sound bytes thrown at them from people who are obviously either lying or trying to slant an issue. the media shares some blame, but people are rarely proactive in their attempts to find out the truth. most just like to complain regardless of what is being done.

 

[riverc0il]

Somebody grab a stick and poke the Silent Majority, see if they're still alive. At least, hold a mirror under their nose or something.

:lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: well put. to quote a lyric from RATM's first album... "something about silence makes me sick..."

 

[ChileMass]

The best thing you can do is cut off what the government wants most - your money. Refuse to send them as much of your tax dollars as possible by electing officials who pledge to reduce taxes. "Oh, but my programs will be cut..." - here's a flash - they're already being cut and what the government does provide it provides poorly and as expensively as possible. See healthcare programs, Social Security and The Big Dig as prime examples.

Sorry friends - don't kid yourselves by thinking the government will provide you with much. This isn't the Depression and that's not FDR in the White House. Do not trust the government to provide you with practically anything you need. The fact is you need to take care of yourself and your money and not look to the government to hand you something for nothing or solve your problems. Take care of yourself and your family and send the government as little as possible because if you're making more than $25,000 per year you won't get any return on your investment. You might as well cut your losses and send as little as possible. This will drive the politicians crazy and keep more money in your own pocket.

For those people that need government programs (elderly, the legitimately poor, disabled), I feel for them. But at least they can get something for having paid taxes all their lives. Me, I'm a middle-aged, middle-class white guy. I get to pay for everything and I get buppkis in return. I get the armed forces, schools for my kids and roads. Beyond that I don't participate in any gov't programs, and I wouldn't send DC or the state a nickel if I didn't have to because I get practically nothing in return.

Be smart - elect people who promise not to waste your money and watch them like a hawk......

 

[riverc0il]

ChileMass, spoken like a libraterian! i'm in agreement regarding fiscal restraint, but i approve of social programs that generally can not be run at a profit (or not run at a profit without sacrificing an important aspect of the program). there isn't much you can do regarding limiting the money you send to the government. the man hands you a tax bill and you have to pay it. if you don't, they eventually come after you for it. electing politicians that promise to cut the tax system is a sound answer, but important programs are being cut. the education system is in shambles currently. "no child" is being left behind officially, because the kids that don't pass the test because of a bad school are dropping out and being taken out of the official count. the system is a wreck because it's not funded to the point that every child is getting the same education in the same environment. there are other examples, just the first to come to mind. just because we do not see benefits personally from taxes, doesn't mean they aren't important. where is the majority of our tax dollar going right now? iraq. in a matter of fact, we are running a HUGE deficit because not enough[/] money is available to go into iraq. are your tax dollars worth that program?

 

[Jaytrek57]

For those people that need government programs (elderly, the legitimately poor, disabled), I feel for them. But at least they can get something for having paid taxes all their lives. Me, I'm a middle-aged, middle-class white guy. I get to pay for everything and I get buppkis in return. I get the armed forces, schools for my kids and roads. Beyond that I don't participate in any gov't programs, and I wouldn't send DC or the state a nickel if I didn't have to because I get practically nothing in return.

Um. Ok...where to start.

First, the assumption that the poor, elderly, disabled have paid their taxes to support services they need is a stretch (yeah, unfair, but realisitic).

How about prisons. Do you benefit from criminals being locked up?

What about DSS (social services) houses for neglected and abused children?

What about veteran services, which will increase in the next 20 years?

I could go on.

Nobody "likes" paying taxes and everyone can spend it better. There are a million and 1 challenges in this country THAT simply put...need money.

The goverment of course can do a much, much, better job about eliminating waste, abuse, etc...with our tax money, but you know what, it is our job to hold them accountable, and as a electorate, we often don't do our job.

The people in goverment don't want your money. They want your vote, so they can THEN tell you what to do with your money.

Rant and therapy session over. :beer:

 

[hammer]

where is the majority of our tax dollar going right now? iraq.

While I would agree that we are spending a lot of $$ on Iraq, and while the Defense Department does take up a large chunk of the budget (of which around 25% is personnel costs, including a good amount of retiree benefits), I believe that the lion's share of the budget still goes to entitlement programs like Medicare and Medicaid.

I normally don't take a libertarian viewpoint, but ChileMass does have some good points.

As far as education goes, I'm getting tired of seeing more and more $$ thrown at education without tangible results...but I think the problems with education in this country are more based on socioeconomic issues then in how much funding there is...

 

[Jaytrek57]

but I think the problems with education in this country are more based on socioeconomic issues then in how much funding there is...

What?

Which school gets more funding. A public school in the heart of Dorchester or Lexington? Which school pays their teachers the best?

I believe the issue of funding and socioeconomics are one in the same.

 

[hammer]

but I think the problems with education in this country are more based on socioeconomic issues then in how much funding there is...

What?

Which school gets more funding. A public school in the heart of Dorchester or Lexington? Which school pays their teachers the best?

I believe the issue of funding and socioeconomics are one in the same.

Sorry, but you don't want to get started on this argument...there are plenty of examples of towns and cities where per student funding is high but there are still a lot of problems in the educational system...

IMO, a lot of problems with educating kids can be attributed to the home and school environment. I think it's a lot harder to get a kid to see the value of a good education when parents either don't realize that themselves or aren't around to care. In that case, you can throw all the $$ into educating that kid and you most likely still won't get decent results.

I wish someone out there had some answers to that problem, though (I certainly don't).

Sorry to go a bit off topic...