Election - 06

[jvcstone]

If you haven't already, please take the time to vote tomorrow. :tup1:

And while you're in the booth, take the time to notice that there are more than donkey's and elephants on the ballot - viable candidates all, even if they are totally ignored by the media. :shrug:

If you don't like the government you have, change the way you vote, and just maybe, we can end business as usual in DC and our respective state houses.

JVC

[Sponsored Links]

[EEEO]

I'm voting for the bears for sure, elephants are too big, and I just don't like donkeys that much.

[JTG]

John
:goodpost:
JTG

[flatfloor]

I decided I'm voting the incumbent out, doesn't matter what party. We need term limits.

[Eugenius]

Right or wrong, go vote. You have no right to complain if you didn't vote. Will Rogers said, "Politicians are as good as the people that voted for them and better than the people that didn't vote at all."

[jane m]

:goodpost: Yes, Jim! I've been screaming term limits forever. We the people are going to have to make them do it, why would they change the system that's treated them so well?

[Shaughnn]

And remember to insist that your vote be recorded on paper. Electronic voting has been proven to be flawed and it is unreliable. Whether by design or incompetance, the electronic voting machines are vulnerable to corruption and tampering. Our votes, ALL OF THEM, are too important to be rushed for the sake of the "10 o'clock news". This is the foundation of democracy, savor it! :yummy:
Shaughnn

[sdaniels7114]

I'm not so sure I agree with that Shaughn. the 99.999999999999999999999999% accuracy rate of ATM transactions seems to point to the potential for a vast improvement in the system with the proper use of computers. Sure we'll have to learn how to make the voting system live up to that potential, but progress is always a little painful.

I hate to be a stick in the mud, but I'm against term limits too. I think in terms of the absurdity of telling say, the Mudmeister himself, that he's too experienced in the tile industry to do my floor and that he should go be a Plumber or something. Elections are enough of a term limit for me.

[Shaughnn]

Steve,
With ATMs, you have a transaction record which you then get a record of every month so that you can spot and challenge mistakes. With electronic voting, you cast your vote and then "poof", it's gone forever and you only have the electronic memory to verify that there's nothing in the programming that's tampered with the numbers. Plenty of seperate studies have been done to establish the ease of writting and distributing a program viruses which will convert election totals and then completely remove themselves from the machine. Look at the election of 2004 and you'll see that the 13 states where exit-polling completely failed, after generations of reliable results, were all computerized voting states. In elections where computerized voting wasn't applied, exit polling matched election results. That is enough of a red flag for me to insist that my vote leave a paper trail.
I agree that regular and periodic elections are all the "term limits" we need. Term limits only force experienced legislators out of office, to be replaced by novices. The lobbiests and other manipulating forces never have to suffer that sort of "reset" and so become more and more powerful while freshman lagislators learn the ropes and get tangled up in all sorts of learning curve nonsense.
Now, how do we dismantle "K Street" and all of the lobbying machinery which we've allowed to choke our governement? That's an answer I'd really be pleased to listen to. :)
Shaughnn

[jvcstone]

Term limits only force experienced legislators out of office, to be replaced by novices.

That's exactly why we need the term limits-- More experience means more power used for personal gain, more corruption, and a focus on re-election, not legislation that is in the best interest of the people. :gerg: The legislature needs to go up there, do the job they are elected to do, and then come home so as to limit the damage they seem to do.

JVC

[John Bridge]

Steve, my position on your argument against term limits has alway been, well, if experienced politicians have gotten us into this mess, then novices can't do any worse and might even improve things. :)

[Shaughnn]

John,
Instead of term limits, persistently scrutinizing your elected officials and applying the legal means to remove them in the middle of term when they misbehave would seem to be more effective. Unless you abolish political parties and lobbiests, you're simply rotating the bullpen, not cleaning house.
Shaughnn

[arn12]

the electronic voting should work--c'mon, with all these geeks around here--fix it! you know, there are more demos in the u.s. if the demos would get off their duff, we wouldn't have the problem we have now. i think the vote count would have to be very close for tweaked machines to make a difference. one thing the republicans have proven: give a person total power and he will surely abuse it. we are going to pay for a long time.

[Splinter]

c'mon, with all these geeks around here--fix it

There'll always be some evil geek out there to f*** it up again.

[EEEO]

Unless you abolish political parties and lobbiests

That's exactly what I think should happen. Unfortunately the majority of the people like the "sheep mentality", and couldn't be bothered to actually listen and learn about the candidates they're voting for; thinking for yourself is too much work. They'd much rather vote on party lines because they think the party actually represents them and their interests. The combination of a 2 party system and lobbyists is a lethal combination, with only 2 parties, the lobbyists enjoy immense power-so much so that I think the majority of policy is driven by the entities behind the lobbyists. Even having 3 major parties would lessen the power of lobbyists, but that won't happen.

Go vote tomorrow, or don't, you have the luxury of choosing either way. Regardless, when you cast your ballot, I'm afraid you're just choosing which crook you want to rob you.

[Tool Guy - Kg]

Good. Sounds like a bunch in here will be out voting tomorrow. Outstanding. :clap1:

That old saying: :gerg: "You have no right to complain if you didn't vote" is excellent.

[darvin kuehl]

VOTING is one of the few rights we have left............flawed as it might be these days. Voting faud is a serious threat to our basic Rights under the Const.. Voting problems have always been around, but , under the unbalanced Goverment we have today, casting your vote is even more important.!!
Its all about balance in Goverment, and we do not have that today. Things are going sideways in Washington. Throwing the GOP majority out ,. is the correct thing to do, if for no other reason , than to bring some balance ............and , to get OUR TROUPS HOME !!!!!!!...............GO VOTE TOMORROW, you won,t regret it.

[jgleason]

I'll be voting tomorrow. Unfortunately, so will my wife. We very nearly cancel each other out on most of our votes. ;)

I like the machines we have for recording ballots in our town. Fill out the little oval, just like taking those SATs. Slide it into the reader and it records your vote. If a manual recount is required then the ballots can be tabulated manually. It's a pretty straightforward system and is very reliable. Could someone mess with it? Sure, but it's better than the hanging chad style of voting or the fancy touch screen no paper trail voting machines.

[arn12]

so what happened to the third parties--this was their chance(s). our status quo is silly and rediculous. VOICE your opinion. can you just imagine the #'s: the 18-35 year olds, the mom's dominated by their biased hubbies, the blacks, the mexicans, the orientals, and the sit-on-your-arse white boys, who are blown off by the good-ole-boy white boys? imagine!!!! we let this b.s. go on election after election w/o change. remember the gas crisis in the Carter admin.? it was going to be fixed. RIGHT!!!!!

[EEEO]

That old saying: "You have no right to complain if you didn't vote" is excellent.

You certainly do if no candidate is offered up that you think is worthy of your vote and doesn't remotely represent you. People who like to say this one are usually the same people that like to say that "if you don't vote for a Democrat or a Republican you're throwing your vote away." It's exactly that mentality that's put us where we are today.

You've no right to judge those who don't vote. The freedom and privilege that allows us to cast our vote, also allows us the choice not to vote.

That said, I'm off to the polls! :)

[jjwq8]

To vote for "none of the above" no doubt:D

[EEEO]

Nah, I always vote for the best candidate, which occasionally requires me to write myself in. :yeah:

[arn12]

seems like we're pretty much thinking alike. i'm inclined to think 3rd party, but that usually ends up being coalition-oriented, etc.--more chaos! beats me. we need more and quicker accountability to the voters. how do we get that done?

[flatfloor]

For starters line item veto. Second prohibit pork amendments from being tacked onto good bills that everyone wants.

But term limits are a must.

I'll bet a third party with Colin Powell would have a good shot. Perot might have had a shot if he didn't go batty. I really don't like the third party concept either but maybe it would wake them up.

[Bugman]

I voted, my wife voted, now we both have every right to complain about all the politicians! :yeah: :rolleyes:

[Scooter]

We need to legalize torture. Electrocution of one's gonads and waterboarding should be used on anyone who doesn't confess. This will make our police work more efficiently.

We need to dispense with the 4th Amendment of prohibiting unreasonable searches and wire taps. What a useless piece of crap getting in the way of an efficient police force.

Then we need to get rid of judges and juries and let the criminals be tried by a private Kangaroo Court without accountability, or any consitutional provisions.

Then and only then, will we as a nation be on the right track.

Oh, I'm sorry, we already have those. Never mind.

[Bearjing]

This sort of echos some of EEEO's sentiments, but here's a concrete example.... my favorite: ME!!

I want to know what you guys think of this... (IE, do you think I've earned the right to complain about the elected officials for the next coupl-a years)...

I went today and did what I suppose is voting. I completed NM's paper ballot only 15 minutes after the polls opened. And I left both bubbles for several of the main races *empty* because I couldn't in good concience lend support to either individual running, and there were no "write in" or third party bubbles available.

So, I want to know: did I vote?

[Bri]

You guys are supposed to be voting, not testing out the lastest Felker! :dunce: http://i.a.cnn.net/cnn/2006/POLITICS/11/07/election.main/newt1.03.voters.ap.jpg

[John Bridge]

Did somebody lob a concusion grenade into Ontario? Where the hell you been, Bri? :D

[Bri]

I've been laying this fantastic new product...it comes in rolls, you can put it over a crap subfloor, it doesn't crack and you don't have to grout it. It's called carpet. :o :fish1:

[flatfloor]

Cathy, hard to say, it seems to me you should at least have a Conservative, and Liberal candidate. Here in NY we had 7 or 8 party choices.

Bri, why would you post a picture of a Pacman tournament? :scratch:

[Shaughnn]

Cathy,
I think that you did vote. By submitting your ballot, even an empty one, you are contributing to the process and making your will be known. :clap2:
Shaughnn

[EEEO]

Well, I've yet to flip on the tube and see what the preliminary results are, but I'm betting I didn't get elected as a write in for any of the Judgeships--it's tough running against the incumbent. :(

[Nightbeast]

ANY American citizen has a right to complain about the politicians regardless of whether they vote or not and whether or not it's because they choose not to vote because they are dissatisfied with their choices or simply because they just don't care to vote. There's a little something called the first ammendment to the constitution that says, succinctly and paraphrased, "freedom of speech". Notice that nothing in the constitution says, "freedom of speech only if you vote". And that unconditional freedom is exactly what our great founders meant to put in the constitution. :clap2: Despite the personality issues of the founders, they wrote an amazing document unlike anything else in history. It gives me chills everytime I think of the wisdom of those people. I just wish some of our current leaders would show the same wisdom once in a while.

Brett

[tileguytodd]

John, I tossed a grenade via email in Bri's General direction a couple weeks ago...........Musta been close :D
Good to cya Bri :tup1:

Ah the vote.........One post mentions learning about the candidates.
Now its all well and good to say it, but have you tried it??
On a national Level information is pretty ez but getting down to the state and regional levels I saw very little to tell me who this person is.

From canned answers to issues (and very few of those), to vote for my grandpa because he cares and NO issues even discussed.

Who are these people that want to represent me????
Why should I vote for this person???

He served 4 years in the coast gaurd - Cmon, he was 20 years old...now hes 55 and its 35 years later...This means nothing to me...tells me nothing about WHO this person is........its only a small flash of who he once was.

All the candidates locally seem to get on at least 1 talk show......at 11 AM or 2 AM when nobody can see it.......Prime time is saved for those with the big money like US SENATE positions and State Governors etc.

For once i would like to see the Biography's come out BEFORE theyve been elected to office and then sent to prison!!! (oh, thats right, they dont do prison.......professional courtesies and all get them govt pardons......Unless its TREASON of course which used to mean trying to assasinate a leader or sell military secrets. Now its treason to disagree with your leader according to JR .....;)

[jjwq8]

Hooodathunkit

Warba Mn

a hotbed of sedition?

Will this all treasonous plotting be an impediment to your really important activities Todd?

[John Bridge]

I agree with you, Brett. I've never begrudged a person the right not to vote. Idjit probably doesn't know the correct candidate to vote for, anyway. :D

[GraniteGirl]

"The world is a dangerous place to live, not because of the people who
are evil, but because of the people who don't do anything about it."
-- Albert Einstein

[darvin kuehl]

GREAT TIMES ARE HERE AGAIN !!!! WE WON !!! Thanks go out to all who went out to vote yesterday..........don,t you feel better now ?
We are not out of the woods yet however, it will be very hard to undo all the damage Bush and friends have done over the last six years. I can only hope we make good progress in the next 2 years, it will be tough !.

[jgleason]

:shake: :shake: :shake:

[jdm]

Well, Joe, at least your wife is happy. And maybe you'll come around during the next two years. :D

[jvcstone]

and the fall-out begins--

Rummy is Done

JVC

[Scooter]

Poor guy--never saw it coming.

Yesterday, Bush said that Dumbsfeld was doing "a heck of a job." That shoulda been a clue that his days were numbered.

Actually, I figure the GOP head honchos demanded the head of someone. They shoulda asked for Karl Rove, but got Dumbsfeld, who took the hit for the team. Bush threw him under the bus.

Just now, NBC and CNN called Montana, and with Missouri in the bag, and Virgina a probable, that probably hands the Senate over to the Dems.

So, lets recount:

Senate
House
All but 2 Governors
Dumbsfeld

A Tsunami for sure. This is really ugly. And with the governors, that means Gerrymandering opportunities, to undo what Karl Rove did.

Any of you Repubs have any explanation for this (other than the voters are stupid)? How could your confidence and predictions been so wrong?

[John Bridge]

I am not elated. Kinky Friedman will not be our next governor. :(

[jgleason]

I'm not a Republican Scooter and was far from confident in the run up to the elections. If you ask me, the R's did this to themselves and deserved to be tossed out. Doesn't mean I'm all that happy that it actually happened but in the long run it will be a good thing.

My positions on a few things -

War - We went in based on intelligence reports, from our own agencies and from others. Once we went in and neutralized the threat (you can argue whether there was sufficient threat or not, fact is we believed there was at the time) we should have gotten out. I'm no fan of nation-building or whatever we decide we're calling it.

Tax Cuts - Make them permanent.

Spending - Zero-based budgeting would be a start, without gimmicks. All spending should be held up to scrutiny. No omnibus spending bills.

Border Security - If you can't control your borders then there is no hope.

Well, the R's certainly screwed up on these issues but I have little hope that the D's will be any better. I sincerely hope I am proved wrong.

I'm also not a big fan of slinging about stupid nicknames for any politician, I didn't like the Slick Willie nickname that a lot of folks used with President Clinton and I don't like the use of Shrub when referring to President Bush. I am not saying anyone doesn't have the right to use derogatory nicknames but, to me, it tends to weaken a person's arguments when nicknames like this are bandied about. Kind of hard for me to take your arguments seriously.

Put forth rational arguments without sounding like your from the tinfoil hat wearing brigade and I'll be more likely to listen.

(All of the above - not directed at any single person on this forum. If you think it is directed at you, it isn't. ;)

[Scooter]

Actually, Joe you and I are on board pretty much 90%, except with the tax cut. I think you could be a Democrat.

We, as a nation, must be pay as you go. Wanna war? Great, raise taxes to pay for it. Wanna a tax cut? Great, figure out EXACTLY what spending is going to be cut to pay for it. Want increased Medicare? So do I, but lets figure out EXACTLY how to pay for it before it gets passed.

Cutting taxes without cutting specific spending is like getting a cash advance on a credit card when the card is near the limit.

I'd add a few things. Keep religion out of politics. I don't pray to your God. Next, keep the government out of my personal life. If I wanna take it up the hindquarters or my wife wants to have an abortion, thats my business, not the government's. Keep the USA safe by securing our borders, ports and airports, and don't let in the whackos on visas for schools or other reasons. Finally, the name calling and labeling as traitors has got to stop.

I noted that the Repubs accused Tammy Duckworth (the legless Iraq Vet who ran in Illinois of cutting and running. Memo: Dude, she has no legs, this joke isn't funny. That crap has got to stop.

[flatfloor]

Scooter, you know where I stand on this war.

I am a Republican who voted Libertarian last night but I found no joy in doing that. You seem gleeful in the Republican loss almost as if it were a grade school punishment for failing. It was not. What you saw was our constitution at work. The populace was displeased with many Republican policies and voted to change them. If you really think the Dems will be more honorable or caring please say so in a 3 years or so when the next group of scallywags are indicted. I use that archaic term purposely since this sort of thing has ever been so.

[Bugman]

Scooter, I can't believe it, but for once I am in agreement with much of what you have to say. :D :clap2: I tend to lean toward the R side, but am totally fed up with the extreme Republican and extreme Democratic party lines. I just hope that Congress can now get some things accomplished instead of bickering over every issue. But . . . I'm not holding my breath.

[davem]

I've never met or talked to a Democrat that understands that a tax cut can INCREASE revenue to the treasury. It just doesn't compute for some reason.

[jgleason]

I believe I can find things to agree with you on Scooter. Plenty of differences too though, and that's okay.

Cutting taxes without cutting specific spending is like getting a cash advance on a credit card when the card is near the limit.
Actually, cutting taxes has demonstrably raised revenue for the government. The problem of course is all of the increased spending that went along with the tax cuts.

I think we would disagree a lot about what programs to cut. for instance, I'm all for abolishing SS, Medicare, Department of Education to name but a few places the federal government has no business raising and spending tax money.

I can agree with you 100% on all of this...
Keep religion out of politics. I don't pray to your God. Next, keep the government out of my personal life. If I wanna take it up the hindquarters or my wife wants to have an abortion, thats my business, not the government's. Keep the USA safe by securing our borders, ports and airports, and don't let in the whackos on visas for schools or other reasons. Finally, the name calling and labeling as traitors has got to stop.

I noted that the Repubs accused Tammy Duckworth (the legless Iraq Vet who ran in Illinois of cutting and running. Memo: Dude, she has no legs, this joke isn't funny. That crap has got to stop.
Plenty of examples on both sides regarding the tasteless jokes and smears. What the heck is up with the Left and there utter contempt for any black politician that dares to run as a Republican anyway? I don't get that.

[Eugenius]

I secretly longed for Kinky Freidman as 'govenor' here in Texas myself. As Kinky said when he filed, "How hard can it be?"
He was right. Serving as an elected official is like eating at a super buffet. Getting elected is like winning the super bowl and Kinky, as much as I love him, was playing 6 man football.
"I want to be you're good shepherd," ...in his television ads Kinky was qouting Jesus and admiting that as a Jew he'd never read the New Testament...then he 'sheepishly ' confessed that come to think of it, he'd never even read the Old Testament. Unlike politicians, truth and comedy have their limits.

As for term limits, I believe that after 2 consecutive terms that a politician should have to move and seek office in a state that does not border his previous tenure.

I like Joe Lieberman. He called today for the embracement of a term that seems to have been forgotten in the political arena...civility

We are the USA. We're not the WWF.

[flatfloor]

Joe Lieberman a good man and an amazing winner. A coalition of Independants, Republicaans and Democrats elected him. Amazingly the cream rose to the top.

Not everone is a rabid hard line political hack or fervent party follower.

[darvin kuehl]

There is a lot of right ( I mean correctness) , in what you all say.....The bottom line is balance. That is what was missing, and look where we were headed, scary thing.
Most of the ills in the world have been maginifed by actions of some dictator, religious nut, fashist, far left, far right, it goes on , and on. Balance is the most we can hope for. Thats what our forfathers had in mind. They established a republic, its up to us to keep it..................

[jjwq8]

Joe,
As someone who gave up any and all attempts to be taken seriously years ago I serve fair warning that any and all who seek public office for private profit (the ONLY REAL reason any of them do it) is fair game to and fully deserving of the same level disdain with which they treat those who put their trust in them.

[Nightbeast]

The following is about the closest I've ever been able to explain to anyone about my politics and views;

I'm a human being first, a terran second, and an American third.

I'm not a republican, I'm not a democrat, I'm not a conservative, and I'm not a liberal.

I'm a rupublican on some things, a democrat on some things, a conservative on some things, and a liberal on some things.

I wish all politicians would simply vote their conscience on all issues and reject anyone who tries to get them to vote on something simply because of party lines. Oh well, you know what they say, wish in one hand and crap in the other and see which one fills up first.

I heard something on the news tonight that I liked. Someone was talking about the way the dems will control for 10 - 15 years, then the repubs will control for 10 - 15 years and they referred to it as a listing ship that rights itself. Good analogy.

Brett

[Bugman]

I heard something on the news tonight that I liked. Someone was talking about the way the dems will control for 10 - 15 years, then the repubs will control for 10 - 15 years and they referred to it as a listing ship that rights itself. Good analogy.

The scary part is the last 5-10 years when the old ship is listing heavily one way or the other and the waves are beginning to break over the rail.

[Scooter]

The sad part about this is that Bush could have saved this election.

Americans are an incredibly forgiving people. Look at Bill Clinton now, he's a frigging rock star.

Bush could have gone on TV last June and said, "Guys, I messed up. I thought there were WMD and there werent, and its my fault I got us into this stupid war. The war hasn't been going well, and I've fired Rumsfeld. Lets all pull together as a Nation, and we'll get through this."

That act even if done last month could have saved the day for the Repubs. What an arrogant ass.

And Dave--"Pay as you Go" does not mean "Pay as we Hope" or "Pay as the Economic Experts Opine". If you say a 50% tax cut will generate that 50% revenue and more, fine and dandy, I'm down with that. Cut spending in the interim to finance the cut. If what you say is right, the money will come in over the next few years and the spending can be restored or we'll have a huge surplus. But Pay as you Go. Period.

And thats the problem with Washington, DC, they pass all these spending bills without a clue how to pay for them, based on hope. Run the US Budget like a regular company that has to manage cash flow.

[Eugenius]

John Bridge, you dissapoint me that you agreed with the "Nightbeast" on one of it's previous posts.

[John Bridge]

What goes on here? Better find a smilie or two to put up there, Eugene. Not sure where you're coming from, but I agreed with Brett's statement. He is a he, not an it, and I don't want to hear anymore of that kind of talk, amigo. :)

[EEEO]

Ah the vote.........One post mentions learning about the candidates.
Now its all well and good to say it, but have you tried it??
On a national Level information is pretty ez but getting down to the state and regional levels I saw very little to tell me who this person is.

From canned answers to issues (and very few of those), to vote for my grandpa because he cares and NO issues even discussed.

Who are these people that want to represent me????
Why should I vote for this person???


That was my post you're referring to Todd. I agree completely. It's nearly impossible to learn about the candidates, even if you try. Look at Foley, ya think he had a few people snowed into thinking he was someone he wasn't? That's part of my point, many people vote on party lines because it's easy and they think that party is working in their best interests. Politicians and parties aren't stupid, they know that the majority of the citizens fly their little Republican or Democrat flags, and faithfully go to the polls voting for "their party." The candidate that actually gives you some information about themselves, their ideas, etc. is a losing candidate. It's much safer for them to regurgitate party politics and take a stand on a non-issue such as marriage to motivate the sheep to go to the polls and cast their vote for the donkey or the elephant.

[Nightbeast]

John, I just gave Eugenius the benefit of the doubt about referring to me as an "it" because I have one of those sometimes non-gender identifiable first names. I just think he's mad cause I disagreed with his hero Will Rogers. :yeah:

Anyway Eugenius, the point of my entire statement was that people have freedom of speech unlimited by conditions. If anyone thinks that someone only has a right to complain if he or she votes, then let's extend that a little. How about, you only have a right to own a gun if you served in the military or you're only considered an American citizen after serving in public office, or you're not allowed to fly an American flag unless you've done both. Again, my point was, you have freedom of speech period regardless of how much it may iritate others. :clap2: Of course, freedom of speech doesn't mean freedom from consequence. Example, yell "fire" in a crowded theatre causing a panic that gets someone killed and you go to jail.

Brett

[jvcstone]

:shake: The candidate that actually gives you some information about themselves, their ideas, etc. is a losing candidate.

Here's another "thought" from the stone carvers idle mind :shades:

Negative comments, mud slinging and other campaingn behavior of that nature should be eliminated, and all campaign advertizing, speeches, etc should be about the issues and that particular candidates stand on them.

How to pull that pipe dream off????


Automatic disqualification from the ballot for any slur against one's opponent :clap2:

I know-- too much time on my hands :shake:

JVC

[Bugman]

Negative comments, mud slinging and other campaingn behavior of that nature should be eliminated, and all campaign advertizing, speeches, etc should be about the issues and that particular candidates stand on them.

WOW!!! Would that be refreshing! Do you think the general public could stand to hear the real issues and the candidates stand on them?

[flatfloor]

Do you think the general public could stand to hear the real issues and the candidates stand on them?

Nope, a lot of expensive research goes into those sound byte slurs,. The research shows they work and people vote based on them. Besides it's hard to discuss an issue in 30 seconds.

[Scooter]

Yep, accusing a legless vet that she was in favor or "cut and run" and "didn't have a leg to stand on" would really affect how I voted.

Next, he try the armless legless jokes.

[sdaniels7114]

To an extent, emerging from a brutal campaign proves that the winning candidate ain't soft. How would the Marines do if the Drill Instructors had to be nice to them all the time?

[Eugenius]

John Bridge, you dissapoint me.

Not only do you want me to send smiley faces to the 'Wildebeast' or whatever kind of beast but you expect me to determine it's gender or species.

I agree. No one has to vote. Why should you have to vote? YOU DON'T HAVE TO VOTE! NO ONE IS STANDING THERE WITH A GUN TO YOUR HEAD!

Voting is a right. It's like a muscle. You don't have to excecise it.

[EEEO]

Negative comments, mud slinging and other campaingn behavior of that nature should be eliminated, and all campaign advertizing, speeches, etc should be about the issues and that particular candidates stand on them.


I totally agree John. Unfortunately, as Flat pointed out, that BS works, so where is the impetus to change it?

Personally I think we need some serious system renovation and reform, and soon. If it doesn't happen I'm afraid we'll see a serious decline in our country on many levels over the next 20 years. Every great empire comes to an end at some point, and I sure as heck don't want it to happen on my watch.

*Edited because I'm a typo-tard.

[Splinter]

I know John and the gang frown upon posts like this, but it just has to be said....

Eugene, you dont belong here anymore... Miserable dolts like you are the one's that are called "trolls" on internet forums. I have trouble with some of the opinions on here, and I choose to bow out of those discussions... I think you should not only bow out of this discussion, you should bow out of visiting this friendly group from now on. :mad:

There's a "smilie" for ya...

[Shaughnn]

Alex,
While I'm not going to delete your post, I'd like to ask you to reconsider it. Please take the higher morale ground and leave the invitations and bannings to the forum's administrative staff.
Eugenius,
Can you please refrain from name-calling. It's not welcome.
Thank you,
Shaughnn

[kilroy]

so... on a different note.....

did any states legalize/decriminalize that wacky weed?
heard something about some refer-endum in NV and or CO?

http://home.comcast.net/~stpaul19/refer.gif

[Padge]

JB said,
He is a he, not an it,
JB, How do you know it's a he? :shrug: Could be a :sheep: I'm just sayin'

As far as the voting thing, it seems pointless to not vote and bitch about the results. :complain: On the same note, to vote just for the sake of voting is---well---stupid :bonk:
I don't have a problem with half (or better) of the people who are eligible to vote not doing so. Apparently, they have more important things to do.:fish2: It actually helps the rest of us who do take the time and consideration to exercise this privilege in having our voices heard.

Incase you couldn't tell, I voted! :yeah:

Padge

[GraniteGirl]

A few of my own observations while scanning this thread:

No one has a "right" to vote. It is nowhere in the constitution. Voting is a civic duty. One that should be taken a whole lot more seriously than a whole bunch of people are. Which might be a good thing, since a lot more people would figure out they could vote for a living if they took time to actually noodle it out.

Freedom comes with responsibilities. Freedom of speech comes with the responsibility of - well responsible speech. If you slander someone, be prepared to have your teeth knocked in. Sling mud? Don't whine if someone slings it right back at you. It is not the government's duty to police who said what and make rules for what should and could be said and at what time. These things should be determoned by who said them and their audience. Don't like what so and so said? Don't vote for him. Easy enough.

Government should not have the role of nanny. In a responsible, free society, things will tend to sort themselves out, since the natural state of anything is balance.

Unfortunately a lot of people (in power and in society) have figured ways to take advantage of other people's money through government. Want to be in power? Promise things like "free" food and medical care. Where do these things come from? Out of MY pocket ( and yours and the Mudmeister's and Flat's and Splinter's and Scooter's and DaveM's and you get the drift) You will get folks to belive you and vote for you and now you have the power of Government to take my money (quite literally at the point of a gun - almost like a robbery) and give it to whomever voted you into power so they will vote for you again next time. You get to skim the cream off the top, though, so sitting where you are is worth hanging on to.

For the folks that voted you into power - they now found out they can have a free ride (sponsored by me and you and John Bridge and....) They just discovered they can vote for a living. Cool, isn't it? Next election they will vote for whomever will promise them the most stuff.

Being free takes hard work and I am afraid a lot of people are too lazy to own up to the responsibilities of it. It sure is a lot easier to sacrifice freedom for a measure of security that could be provided by government.

But this is just me.

[davem]

Mud slinging. Think about it for a second and you'll see there's no way to just "discuss the issues".

Anything can be said from the stump, it's a politicians record that must be examined. There are many politicians that have to hide from their records while campaigning. I'll example this from my usual point of view, the conservative one. I'm sure liberals could come up with examples from their point of view.

A liberal pol who has a long voting record of raising taxes is running for re-election. In most places in the country this pol can't campaign on that record, stumping proudly that they will look for every chance to raise taxes. They'd never win on that, so they will move to the right, trying to sound more conservative than they are.

Isn't it fair for the opponent to point out the pols voting record, thus pointing out the truth alteration? I say it is. Others say it's slinging mud and "going negative".

[cx]

No one has a "right" to vote. It is nowhere in the constitution. Whilst trying to stay clear of the fray, I'd offer a little correction here. You'll find voting referred to as a "right" in the fifteenth, nineteenth, and twenty-fourth amendments where such right is specifically protected for citizens regardless of race, color, previous condition of servitude, gender, or inability to pay a poll tax. It was also considered a right when an amendment was proposed for protection for citizens living in the District of Columbia, which was never passed.

So, while I agree that it is a solemn responsibility in our form of government, I would also consider it a right of citizenship.

That right, conscientiously exercised by informed citizens, provides all the term limits we really need. Whether citizen apathy or deception on the part of candidates is the greater problem with that part of the system is certainly debatable, of course, but a workable system is in place.

My opinion; worth price charged.

[EEEO]

:topicoff:

Internet forums are interesting, and I've been a part of several over the years. Heck, I used to post on old BBS's in the late 80's with my dial up 1200 baud modem from my 9.5" monochrome Mac Plus screen. Things were alot different then, but only when it came to technology. There were still cases where people didn't get along, arguments broke out, and feelings were hurt(even on boards as innocuous as a tile forum). Sadly, it often was through no fault of the individuals, but rather the sterility of the medium. It's difficult to "read" what some people are saying on occasion, and it's obvious that in an all text environment(our excellent smiley selection notwithstanding) people will often interpret things far differently than they would in a face to face encounter. I've always said that offense is taken and not given. One could say the most seemingly offensive things and it's entirely up to me whether I can either take offense, consider the source and disregard the statement, or consider that I may have misinterpreted what was said, never the less, I'm the one who chooses to be offended. Of course I'm not referring to those who intend to be hurtful and derogatory, and go out of their way to do so. Those people are definitely the "trolls."

Just some food for thought. :)

[GraniteGirl]

Whilst trying to stay clear of the fray, I'd offer a little correction here. You'll find voting referred to as a "right" in the fifteenth, nineteenth, and twenty-fourth amendments where such right is specifically protected for citizens regardless of race, color, previous condition of servitude, gender, or inability to pay a poll tax.

I stand duly corrected, sir :fim:

Serves me right for mixing my constitutions. :dunce:

Hailing from a country where democracy (one man one vote a.k.a. mob rule) rules supreme, it irks me no end that people are given all the freedoms and are not prepared to defend them or use them responsibly.

The rest of my rant remains in effect, though. :D

[flatfloor]

If it doesn't happen I'm afraid we'll see a serious decline in our country

You haven't noticed anything happening?

Next election they will vote for whomever will promise them the most stuff.

Nothing new there, the Romans promised Bread and Circuses not too long before the fall.

That right, conscientiously exercised by informed citizens, provides all the term limits we really need

I beg to differ with my learned colleague from the great Republic of Texas (how's that for politician speak?)

I am sure the fathers couldn't have imagined mass media, lobbying to the extant it goes on today and probably didn't envision career politicians. They certainly didn't foresee mass media campaigns and the winner determined by how much money a candidate had to spend.

Eric..:goodpost:

[Eugenius]

Splinter, was that a smile or a similie?

[Nightbeast]

Eugenius, my species is human, presumably just like yours :stick: . I notice you keep letting John Bridge know how disappointed you are with him, but you keep referring to me through indirect methods. I can't help but wonder, does my nickname offend thee? At any rate, since my arguments so far have regarded freedom of speech not freedom or rights related to voting, I just want to say that I have no problems with anything you have said. You have not offended me nor can you possibly do so. So, to those who want to kick you out of the thread, while understandable, I disagree because I wouldn't be much of a champion of free speech if I harp on about it and then want to have you kicked out for executing that freedom. In fact, I thought the 'Wildebeast' comment rather humorous and creative (although hardly genius as say mule or donkey would have been. Get it? "Beast" of burden.) as well as Padge's sheep post.

Padge said, "JB, How do you know it's a he :shrug: ? Could be a :sheep: I'm just sayin'"

Padge, I'm not a :sheep: . But, if I were one you should know! Just kidding.

Anyway, this is the last I'll comment on this particular subject "freedom of speech" :clap2: . I've made my view about as clear as I can. Clear as mud I'm sure. If anyone else is offended for some reason, then it's up to the moderators to handle things. As for me, I have very thick skin and can defend myself just fine without resorting to making fun of nicknames. But if you want to do that for fun, I say create a thread called "Nicknames" and let's all get creative. :yeah:

[jjwq8]

I think I have this sussed.
Nightbeast, thickskin. Gotta be Black Rhino:nod: I win!

[Padge]

Padge, I'm not a . But, if I were one you should know! Just kidding.

Alright Nighthing. First off, don't throw a jab and make an immediate apology(it ain't very beastly actin') though maybe later, IF, you were wrong. As you can see, I'm leading by example. I didn't nor will I apologize for calling you Nighthing. :dance:
Secondly,with all that thick skin, hooves and apparently a horn (sorry ' bout the sheep comment, I didn't know :shrug: ), surley, you can come up with a better comeback than that. Maybe I can help. Hum--let's see. :scratch:
Hows about something like ---Padge, I'm not a :sheep: But, if I were one, I think I could get to likin' Eugenius. :eek:

Padge :wave:

[flatfloor]

This is becoming nonsensical.