Democracy...

[questor]

Buffy, i will speak to only the one area in your reply to me in which i think you erred.
Buffy..''How would you know if you don't watch it? Does Bill O'Reilly tell you? In fact the biggest complaint that most have about the media these days is that they are scared to death of doing anything "investigative" or counter to what the people in power want to have said lest they lose their "press access" (the white house does shut out reporters they don't like!) "Liberal media" is a red herring: just ask this question: if the media is so liberal and so influential, why are there still so many conservatives?''

i don't need O'Reilly to think for me, i have that capability.
it is EXACTLY the so-called investigative stories that produce problems for the liberal press. they will generally leave out the parts that don't jibe with their agenda. eg:
1. the anti-Bush story by Dan Rather and Marjorie Mapes
2. the consistent lie about Bush lying about WMD. a lie is when you tell a known falsehood. this particular issue was agreed upon by Clinton, Tenet, Kerry, and members of Congress, yet the accusation persists
3. the Valerie Plame issue. she was not a covert agent at the time in question

why would i listen to Al Franken? what does he have other than a hatred for Republicans. what do any of the other Democrats have except criticism? do you ever hear any solutions for problems from that side of the aisle?

as to your last comment, people are becoming conservative because it makes sense. take a good look at the constituency of the Democratic party. as people become more educated, they better understand what it takes for a strong society, and they vote conservative.

[Buffy]

Great example of what I'm talking about. Your points can be seen as just as biased as the items you hold up to contempt.

"The other side is a bunch of liars and cheats and they are bringing down society, and are behind the conspiracy to sap and impurify all of our precious bodily fluids." Until we all realize that we are in this together and have to cooperate (as apostates like John McCain and Hillary Clinton are pointing out these days, much to the chagrin of their respective parties), democracy in this country will continue to deteriorate.

Hate breeds hate,
Buffy

[questor]

Buffy, you said:
"The other side is a bunch of liars and cheats and they are bringing down society, and are behind the conspiracy to sap and impurify all of our precious bodily fluids."

may i ask whom you are quoting in this statement? Questor

[lindagarrette]

Originally Posted by questor

since Robert Redford is totally committed to far out liberal causes, i would not put much faith in any issues he espouses. there are several problems in our system of government. here are a few:
1. a poorly informed and apathetic electorate. less than 50% of eligible voters participate.
2. power hungry politicians
3. money hungry lobbyists and politicians
4. lack of oversight on abuses
5. pork barrel politics. quid pro quo on local issues not important to the country
6. a liberal leaning public media which espouses the liberal line no matter what harm it does to the country
7. a poorly run Federal government that acts as a vast welfare system for
incompetent workers and beaurocrats.
8. a poorly conducted election system in which the issues are not clearly defined or presented
9. an election system in which money plays the most important role
10. lack of full disclosure and truth by the media

That's what the movie is all about and attempts to demonstrate. You hit on every point.

[questor]

if you agree that these are the problems, then what would you propose as solutions to the problems?

[Buffy]

Originally Posted by questor

may i ask whom you are quoting in this statement?

Its an amalgam of many statements, and it does not refer to a particular political viewpoint (which is my main point here!) although the last clause is a direct quote from General Jack D. Ripper...

Cheers,
Buffy

[C1ay]

Originally Posted by Boerseun

'Direct' vs 'Representative' Deomcracy is the issue - but 'Representative' Democracy creates the gap for egotistical losers to make their stand; their stand being exactly what the popular issue at the time might be.

'Direct' might be more of a schlep, but I think it would be closer to the ideal of what we mean when we talk of 'Democracy' to begin with.

'Representative' would be 'Governance by an egotistical a-hole who happened to agree with you on one single point'.

'Direct' would be 'Governance by the people on every issue, executed by an appointed team who could also be removed by the people if incompetent'.

Am I idealistic? Am I a dreamer? Probably. I just think the whole representative deal favours a small minority of people, and 'governance by the people' goes flying out the back door.

Neither one is really a good answer.

All direct democracies in history have failed. As soon as the people learn that they can vote themselves gifts from the public treasury the system goes bankrupt and ends up in anarchy.

The US respresentative democracy is evidence that it heads in the same direction. As soon as the people learn that they can vote in the representative that promises the most gifts from the public treasury then they tend to vote that way. America is not living within it's means and every election season takes it deeper in debt.

I don't have the magic answer but I think it's not the democracies of now or the past based on observable history. I do favor a representative system because it does eliminate the direct ability for those that can't see the big picture from voting in initiatives that are not in the best interest of all. There are huge groups of people stupid enough to believe that the government could give everyone a paycheck. Representation at least adds a possible layer of responsibility between the voting booth and legislation.

As such I tend to think the US system is a step in the right direction with some shortcomings. I think there should be a better way to prioritize the issues congress chooses to work on. If the public wants the congress to work on healthcare then that's what they should work on. I also think there should be a better means to hold the government responsible to bring the budget under control. Law makers should not have the ability to legislate the country's checkbook into the red.

I also think the executive branch should be changed to a body of individuals instead of just one President. Perhaps a makeup like that of the Supreme Court with 9 executives, one of which is the Chief Executive. These individuals should not promise the people anything but responsible governance. Today's presidential candidates want to promise the people the moon when they are not even authorized to grant such a gift. These are not the statesman we need as governors.

In short, I think some form of democracy is needed since the government should be by the people, for the people and of the people. The people should not be able to vote their country into bankruptcy though.

Just my 2¢,

[questor]

if you scroll down in the social sciences section of the forum, you will find this issue expounded upon by several current members. go to:
America's Sick Election System - 08-02-2005, 09:39 AM

[InfiniteNow]

Originally Posted by Buffy

...although the last clause is a direct quote from General Jack D. Ripper...

Gotta love Kubrick.

"Well, I've been to one world fair, a picnic, and a rodeo, and that's the stupidest thing I ever heard come over a set of earphones. You sure you got today's codes? "

POE:
Purity of Essence or Peace on Earth


"I... I don't know exactly how to put this, sir, but are you aware of what a serious breach of security that would be? I mean, he'll see everything, he'll... he'll see the Big Board!"



"Gentlemen, you can't fight in here! This is the War Room!"



~~~~~~~~~~~~
InfiniteNow

[InfiniteNow]

Originally Posted by C1ay

I don't have the magic answer but I think it's not the democracies of now or the past based on observable history. I do favor a representative system because it does eliminate the direct ability for those that can't see the big picture from voting in initiatives that are not in the best interest of all.

You're right on a number of levels C1ay, unfortunately, from my limited perspective, there seems to be a growing number of representatives that we elect who also cannot see the big picture. There doesn't seem to be too many altruistic people in government these days, at least not ones smart enough and supported enough to implement that altruism.



~~~~~~~~~~~~
InfiniteNow