Yahoos protest

[stratman]

That's a good question strat - I'm not sure what the general consensus would be on that, but if you take a look at the current polls, Hillary so far is not doing too terribly with the country as a whole, if that tells you anything.

Would I vote for her? Hell-to-the-no, not because of the fact that she is a woman, but because I think she is completely wrong for this country. Would I vote for Obama? Again, no - but not as strongly as I feel about Hillary, and mostly on his inexperience with foreign policy, and his tendency to be swayed by the political currents, much like the rest of the current candidate pool.

I would welcome with open arms anyone who I feel could truly lead this country back to greatness; among them would be a.) Colin Powell (who of course is black), and b.) As Buckeye mentioned, Condoleezza Rice (who of course is both woman and black.

So yes I, personally am more than ready for either to happen, because a great candidate is a great candidate, regardless.

Condi Rice would get my vote immediately, as long as the candidate embraces the same philosophy that I have.

 

[stratman]

Yes, true. But the fact that the matter of race (or gender) is ever raised denotes discrimination. Ultimately, these matters should never be an issue if we want to be in an "all men are created equal" society.

Like I wrote before, many Blacks are not in Obama's camp because they feel he's "too white", and his supporters are now being asked would you vote for him if he were white. The inferred alternative being of course Clinton.

I agree, these matters shouldn't be an issue, but they are. I think of it more as a human condtion than a political one. Unfortunately the "all men created equal" society is Utopian at best, you've got to change the heart to change the person, we have all the laws that we need to make racism "illegal" as far as discrimination, but if the heart isn't changed the law is a moot point.

"Too white:" any black person not catering exclusively to blacks.

 

[Johnd]

I agree, these matters shouldn't be an issue, but they are.

Yes. But why? Perhaps it's because naysayers inject their unheeding dogma that discussions such as these are bunch of white guys (ironically, Darien has stated he's Black...and for all I know, so are a couple of other members) "intellectualizing." Hmmph. That's beneficial contributory.

Unfortunately the "all men created equal" society is Utopian at best

No, I believe it is a goal we should strive for, not simply some Utopian rhetoric. I don't believe that statement written in the Declaration as a truism: it was written as a mandate.

"Too white:" any black person not catering exclusively to blacks.

I don't know about that. I've understood it to mean unsympathetic to their cause, their plight. Either way, it's the same old story again: we are left with a choice of least evils...never the perfect candidate.

So we need to do our homework, and have them answer directly the real issues, rather than listen to these prearranged speeches where the candidates are given the questions ahead of time, and debate does not occur.

 

[stratman]

So we need to do our homework, and have them answer directly the real issues, rather than listen to these prearranged speeches where the candidates are given the questions ahead of time, and debate does not occur. [/QUOTE]

If politics has taught me anything is that no candidate will ever tell the complete truth, none will take a hard position (at the onset of the race, once in power, that's a different story), they want to be "everyman," I don't think we'll ever see a true debate where the public asks the questions and the answers aren't formatted. The political machine wouldn't allow it.

 

[Johnd]

If politics has taught me anything is that no candidate will ever tell the complete truth, none will take a hard position (at the onset of the race, once in power, that's a different story), they want to be "everyman," I don't think we'll ever see a true debate where the public asks the questions and the answers aren't formatted. The political machine wouldn't allow it.

Well, Strat, we disagree.

We are the machine. Without our votes (forget about Electoral College for the sake of this argument), without the people, these politicians would not exist.

People need to voice their opinion, ask the questions that need to be asked, and Unite! (more shameful "intellectualizing" )

But this is true: rather than being complacent and simply accepting the candidate that is spoonfed us, it is our right, in fact, our obligation to form the candidate that befits us!

 

[Halon451]

So we need to do our homework, and have them answer directly the real issues, rather than listen to these prearranged speeches where the candidates are given the questions ahead of time, and debate does not occur. :mad

If politics has taught me anything is that no candidate will ever tell the complete truth, none will take a hard position (at the onset of the race, once in power, that's a different story), they want to be "everyman," I don't think we'll ever see a true debate where the public asks the questions and the answers aren't formatted. The political machine wouldn't allow it.

Spot on, strat - agreed. As someone mentioned earlier in this thread, it would be political suicide to really hone in on the underlying darker aspects of our modern society (racism being one), and refusing to take a stand one way or another on it. It would signify the end of their career, no doubt about it. However, it is impossible to satisfy all 300 some odd million Americans living in the US today with one candidate. What we need is one to stand on the most important issues that are facing our time, and as humbly as possible, vow to lead this country in an efficient, responsible, and dedicated manner. No single candidate is EVER going to receive 100% of the votes, but that is what makes our system so great. That we are given the choice. I think the biggest shortcoming of all the candidates is that they fail to realize this concept, and (as you stated) are intent on playing the "Everyman" role.

It's just not possible.

 

[Johnd]

Spot on, strat - agreed. As someone mentioned earlier in this thread, it would be political suicide to really hone in on the underlying darker aspects of our modern society (racism being one), and refusing to take a stand one way or another on it.

Only because we've tolerated that to be the way the process works...it did not use to be that way. It wasn't that long ago where the important topics were brought to the table, and the candidate with the best proposal, the most lucid and realistic solution...got the job. What's happened? Complacency. Fear.

And that's my point. It would be better for the US to have a society of discontents at this time. Rather, we have a society of complacent, spoonfed individuals that are afraid to speak their minds and ask the right questions.

Don't blame the ethereal "system", Halon...it's us.

 

[stratman]

Only because we've tolerated that to be the way the process works...it did not use to be that way. It wasn't that long ago where the important topics were brought to the table, and the candidate with the best proposal, the most lucid and realistic solution...got the job. What's happened? Complacency. Fear.

And that's my point. It would be better for the US to have a society of discontents at this time. Rather, we have a society of complacent, spoonfed individuals that are afraid to speak their minds and ask the right questions.

Don't blame the ethereal "system", Halon...it's us.

John I agree with you, the problem is: how do we change the system? Hasn't the independent party tried to do this? Perot and few others along the way, I feel the majority of Americans are very comfortable (numb) with a two party system and feel they're "throwing away" their vote to a third party. We have to vote, it's our duty, but again: how do we change the system? I'll be first in line if we can improve this situation.

 

[Rickster71]

It's easy to be young, and idealistic about how things should be: honest politicians, all races, 'just getting along'
Unfortunately, as Stratman said, "It's Utopian at best."

IMHO, what happens is, we live our lives and have different life experiences.
We come to an understanding that the 'Text Book, Politically Correct' version of life, just isn't true.
We carry around our own personal version of that truth.
A version that no one will know, or understand; until they've walked in our shoes.

 

[Johnd]

John I agree with you, the problem is: how do we change the system? Hasn't the independent party tried to do this? Perot and few others along the way, I feel the majority of Americans are very comfortable (numb) with a two party system and feel they're "throwing away" their vote to a third party. We have to vote, it's our duty, but again: how do we change the system? I'll be first in line if we can improve this situation.

Well, wait a minute strat. I never said I have any answers. Just questions. Fly in the ointment.

I think the first step is demanding answers of our politicians...on the local level. Once one is warmed up to that, move to your Senators and Congressman...and then allow it to trickle up to the Presidential level.

I don't think it can be done in one fell swoop. But personal responsibility and feeling of obligation has everything to do with it. And it did not take one hundred years for the campaigning and debates to get like this. If we are interested and sincere, it should take far less time to get it back on track.

I mean, who amongst us really knows what Clinton, Obama, Huckaby...or any of the candidates for that matter truly propose to remedy our economic, healthcare, crime, elderly and education woes? It is not enough to identify a patently major problem with our economy. What do you propose??? That is the question that cannot be asked to often.

 

[Johnd]

It's easy to be young, and idealistic about how things should be: honest politicians, all races, 'just getting along'
Unfortunately, as Stratman said, "It's Utopian at best."

IMHO, what happens is, we live our lives and have different life experiences.
We come to an understanding that the 'Text Book, Politically Correct' version of life, just isn't true.
We carry around our own personal version of that truth.
A version that no one will know, or understand; until they've walked in our shoes.

And to that I respectfully say "Poppycock" Rickster.

We put them in office. We can take them out of office. And it is incumbent upon us to qualify them prior to them getting our vote, and then to verify that they keep doing their job while in office. It's not "Utopia." It is civic-minded, and being politically active and responsible, even on a minimal level. Too many of us are neither of these things.

 

[Halon451]

Don't blame the ethereal "system", Halon...it's us.

John, last time I checked we are the system. Political leaders don't formulate their stances arbitrarily - they form them based on the current notions of the populus. It's not that I think you don't understand this John, but I think you missed my point.

My point is that our system is both inherently unstable and balanced at the same time, and that is what makes it as great as it is. We have many choices and decisions that other parts of the world never experience. But with such a large voting population, it is impossible to be the one golden candidate in which everyone rallies behind. They still call this concept, democracy - majority wins. So, "we" are most definitely part of the system, and of this great "machine" that carries us forth into uncertain futures.

"We" need to start caring a little more about who we vote for, and what the real issues are in this country, which ties right in with my earlier rant about the goofiness and apathy of modern America. The way to do this is pay attention.

 

[avaserfi]

If we are interested and sincere, it should take far less time to get it back on track.

John, I full heartedly agree with what you have said, but the cynic in me just doesn't see the people of this country being "interested and sincere" about a topic like this.

Even ignoring abysmal voting rates which is a sign people simple don't care there seems to be a large issue within the groups who care. Perhaps I am not giving credit where it is due, but it seems in todays world of politics few care about all or even most of the issues and problems that plague our country. Rather than worry about the real problems the various lobbies in this country, the real source of power, have picked their issue and focus on it and situations that could effect their view.

As I see it current trends within the US population and politics in general something that greatly effects the public such as another depression must occur to perhaps open peoples eyes. Sadly, knee jerk reaction seems to be the only way to get our population to do anything. Remember how worked up people were after September 11th, barely five years later and the majority of the population seem to have forgotten.

In the end I believe after years of ambivalence our political system has essentially been flushed itself down the toilet and no one cares that we are wading through ****.

 

[Johnd]

John, last time I checked we are the system. Political leaders don't formulate their stances arbitrarily - they form them based on the current notions of the populus. It's not that I think you don't understand this John, but I think you missed my point.

My point is that our system is both inherently unstable and balanced at the same time, and that is what makes it as great as it is. We have many choices and decisions that other parts of the world never experience. But with such a large voting population, it is impossible to be the one golden candidate in which everyone rallies behind. They still call this concept, democracy - majority wins. So, "we" are most definitely part of the system, and of this great "machine" that carries us forth into uncertain futures.

"We" need to start caring a little more about who we vote for, and what the real issues are in this country, which ties right in with my earlier rant about the goofiness and apathy of modern America. The way to do this is pay attention.

Yes. Well, for the most part. And we have a right to be demanding of our candidates. Terms like the "system" and "machine" are inherently abstract...that's what I was writing.

We, the people, need to be more demanding of the answers of our candidates. We are not well informed as it is. We cannot be...by design. And it is too late to correct the debates for this election, but it may not be for the next one, or the one after that.

We have a lot of problems in this country right now, and I do not feel they're being adequately addressed by any of the candidates. In fact, I know they're not. And that makes me lose trust, confidence and respect in those candidates.

 

[avaserfi]

We have a lot of problems in this country right now, and I do not feel they're being adequately addressed by any of the candidates. In fact, I know they're not. And that makes me lose trust, confidence and respect in those candidates.

The candidates play to the people plain and simple. Losing, confidence and respect in the candidates is the same as losing it in the people.

Refer to my previous post for my thoughts on this situation.

 

[Johnd]

John, I full heartedly agree with what you have said, but the cynic in me just doesn't see the people of this country being "interested and sincere" about a topic like this.

And that's a problem.

Even ignoring abysmal voting rates which is a sign people simple don't care there seems to be a large issue within the groups who care. Perhaps I am not giving credit where it is due, but it seems in todays world of politics few care about all or even most of the issues and problems that plague our country. Rather than worry about the real problems the various lobbies in this country, the real source of power, have picked their issue and focus on it and situations that could effect their view.

And as a society, we need to care not only for ourselves, but also our family members, friends, and dare I say, society as a whole. Too many do not realize the symbiotic nature of our society, and how these issues, "that don't affect me", really do (affect us).

As I see it current trends within the US population and politics in general something that greatly effects the public such as another depression must occur to perhaps open peoples eyes. Sadly, knee jerk reaction seems to be the only way to get our population to do anything. Remember how worked up people were after September 11th, barely five years later and the majority of the population seem to have forgotten.

For some, yes. Never forget, but we need to move on and address all the issues that impact us.

In the end I believe after years of ambivalence our political system has essentially been flushed itself down the toilet and no one cares that we are wading through ****.

And that is simply a mentality. Despair. And that can be changed...it needs to change.

 

[Johnd]

The candidates play to the people plain and simple. Losing, confidence and respect in the candidates is the same as losing it in the people.

Refer to my previous post for my thoughts on this situation.

Well, sure they're playing to the people. That's my point. Let the people demand a different act, and we shall get it.

 

[Halon451]

We are not well informed as it is. We cannot be...by design.

I agree wholeheartedly - it is extremely difficult to ascertain the true nature of our cause and the issues of today, when every available outlet of information (the media) is politically biased in some way or another. Short of hitting the road yourself, and personally interviewing 300 million Americans on what they feel is the most pressing issues, I'm at a loss as to what to do about it, other than try to pick the few good nuggets from the pile of steaming garbage that's fed to us every day.

We have a lot of problems in this country right now, and I do not feel they're being adequately addressed by any of the candidates. In fact, I know they're not. And that makes me lose trust, confidence and respect in those candidates.

No, they are not being addresssed - the name of the game is political bashing, and winning by default over the opponents' own shortcomings. I have lost a good deal of faith in the election and campaign process because of this, but I haven't lost all hope. I feel that somewhere out there a figure might emerge one day that doesn't get sucked into the madness. There have been some brief, inspring moments among some of the current candidates, but not enough for me to say beyond a shadow of a doubt - yes, that's the one.

Watching the debates these days is almost like watching a schoolyard pissing match between 5th graders. It's juvenile and does nothing to further our nation's cause.

 

[Rickster71]

And to that I respectfully say "Poppycock" Rickster.

We put them in office. We can take them out of office. And it is incumbent upon us to qualify them prior to them getting our vote, and then to verify that they keep doing their job while in office. It's not "Utopia." It is civic-minded, and being politically active and responsible, even on a minimal level. Too many of us are neither of these things.

John, if what I've said is such "Poppycock;" when in our history, has your version of how it should be, ever taken place?

I strongly believe our political system isn't supposed to 'work'.
It is supposed to give (we, tax payer lemmings) the allusion of it 'working'
The system works just enough to keep the tax payers pacified.
Pacified, just enough to keep the tax money 'Shell Game' going.

 

[Johnd]

I agree wholeheartedly - it is extremely difficult to ascertain the true nature of our cause and the issues of today, when every available outlet of information (the media) is politically biased in some way or another. Short of hitting the road yourself, and personally interviewing 300 million Americans on what they feel is the most pressing issues, I'm at a loss as to what to do about it, other than try to pick the few good nuggets from the pile of steaming garbage that's fed to us every day.

Yes...but not impossible Halon. Scour more than the surface of AP wire, Times, Post, Tribune, etc., and yes, even network television news (limited doses, of course), and one can get a more complete pictue. It's really not that hard (I'm not telling you this Halon...just spiffballing here) when one seeks the information...and the truth.

Watching the debates these days is almost like watching a schoolyard pissing match between 5th graders. It's juvenile and does nothing to further our nation's cause.

That's funny. You just conjured up the image of my old high school teacher, James Copeland, conducting the 1980 Presidential debate between Ronald Reagan and Jimmy Carter. There was still honor then...and people eagerly listened to the debate...for information and promise. Now it is a cheap sideshow orchestrated by network television.