OT: Soviet Re-Birth

[Spectarofdeath]

This is the first time I've even considered voting. The next 4-8 years really are going to be a major turning point for the US and indeed the world. The thing I don't get is how Clinton had impeachment proceedings against him for lying about a affair while Good ol boy GW just says "our intel was wrong, don't look at me" and nothing happens. If you take the nation to war and it turns out that the reasons you did it weren't accurate you need to be held accountable. I guess like someone earlier said, the choices if Bush were impeached just get worse and worse. I'm not sure really which party I would be considered, I agree with the democrats that the wealthy (who have much more to give) should make a much larger contribution to the nation then the poor (who don't have much to give). OTOH I strongly believe in the 2nd amendment so that would put me with the republicans. IMO we NEED to get rid of the party system, or at least get more then 2 parties. Also the whole voting system (electoral college) deciding who wins is flawed. Whats the point in even counting the popular vote? If the two are in agreement ok, if someone wins the electoral and loses the popular, then something else needs to be done.

McCain wants us in Iraq for another 100 years. Obama seems to have good ideas, but in the debates I've seen never really says how he intends to accomplish them. Hillary has good ideas as well, but I can't help but wonder how much would be her and how much would be Bill. We don't need what Russia has now. Also as flawed as the argument is, are their only 2 families that can run the US? If I do vote it will probably be for a democrat.

[Fyron]

Randallw said:
My stance is that these are morals that they believe in and believe are good for people. If you don't let them try to enact them then you are basically saying "ok you can be in government but don't try to do what you think is best".

So are you saying we should allow the christian fundamentalists to destroy science education by putting ID as a first-class member of biology class? We should deny human beings rights based on sexual orientation, just because some fundamentalists read the Bible incorrectly (along the same exact lines as gender and racial discrimination in the past)?

In my mind there is soemthing wrong with people that don't believe in something.

Humanist egalitarianism is not something valid to believe in? Secularism is not a lack of belief in anything, its belief in not governing by an arbitrary organized religion (since that has always lead to tyranny against the other in the whole of human history).

Spectarofdeath said:
I agree with the democrats that the wealthy (who have much more to give) should make a much larger contribution to the nation then the poor (who don't have much to give)

30% of 1,000,000 is a hell of a lot more money than 30% of 40,000. Whatever happened to the principles of liberty and equality?

Also the whole voting system (electoral college) deciding who wins is flawed. Whats the point in even counting the popular vote?

The point is that the US is a confederation of semi-independent states, not one singular mono-nation with power stemming from the top. It was set up the way it is so that every state at least gets some say in the government, regardless of population. If you do away with the electoral college and go to a straight, nation-wide popular vote, you also need to do away with the Senate. It creates vastly disproportional representation in the national legislature as well. You should probably also do away with the separation of powers between state and federal governments, since its all part of the same basic form of government. The electoral college is a far more complex issue than one might imagine.

[Renegade 13]

AgentZero said:
Renegade: My main issue with Harper is the fact that he seems quite in favour of passing his conservative Christian beliefs into laws. I have no particular issue with leaders having conservative (or any other) religious views, but when they attempt to force these beliefs on people who don't share them by enacting them as secular laws, such action tends to reduce me to an incoherent frothy-mouthed zealot whose most eloquent statement on the subject can be summed up as, "RAHHH! YOU BAD! AZ SMASH NOW!"

State <================================================= ====> Church

Isn't that how it's supposed to work?

It is indeed. I guess because I am a very right-leaning person, that I see him as much better than the crap-*** Liberals we had in for far far far too long previously (and, by the way, I still think he's 10 times better).

Plus, you have to like a leader who doesn't go around bashing our largest trading partner and biggest ally (the US) like the Liberals (and NDP, who continue to do so... hippy bastards) did the last few years they were in.

And yet, at the same time, isn't afraid to wave the big stick at the US when the time is right.

Remember a few weeks ago, maybe even a couple months ago, during some US Democratic campaigning ****e, Obama and Clinton were both yapping about renegotiating NAFTA because they were whining that it was hurting the automobile manufacturing sector in states like (I think) Michigan and Pennsylvania, to be more in the US's favor.

Harper's comment was something along the lines of... Ok, we'll renegotiate NAFTA, but remember, Canada is the largest supplier by far to the US of energy, primarily in the form of oil, so if you want to renegotiate NAFTA, we have a way better bargaining chip.

In other words, he's not afraid to wave the big stick, while also not pointlessly bashing the US like previous gov't's have. That, I like.

=========

As for the US election... I think you're screwed no matter who you get. Sorry, but that's how I see it.

As long as someone has to be extraordinarily wealthy to come into the highest political office you have, there's something wrong with the system. When you have to spend millions of your own money to even stand a chance at having your name known to the voting public, or to stand a chance of being your party's candidate, the system is screwed.

There could be plenty of people out there, ready, willing and capable of leading your country to better times, but they lack the financial resources to make it happen, to even be considered. This, in my opinion, is just wrong. That said... I don't know how to avoid it with your current electoral system.

[Spectarofdeath]

So liberty and equality = rich live like kings and poor homeless, well thats just their problem, at least their equal to the rich...until it comes to who has the $ to throw around. Sorry, there's no such thing as equality when it concerns humans. As far as the election thing goes, I never said base it solely off of popular vote, but the way it is now the pop. vote is pretty much discarded (to my knowledge anyway).

[Atrocities]

Everybody thank you all for playing nice and please continue to do so. Thank you.

[AgentZero]

I think one of the big problems facing America right now is the concept that you must chose between Democrats and embrace all liberal ideals, or Republicans and embrace all the conservative ideals. But most people I know don't fully subscribe to the right or the left. Personally, my views on civil matters (gay marriage, healthcare, education) are fairly liberal, though some (ie: Abortion) are closer to the conservative view. But then my economic views coincide quite well with the conservative outlook, though I have some economic opinions that approach socialism.

Which inevitably means that I wind up voting for a different party every election. I might vote liberal one year so they can pass protections for "alternative lifestyles" one year, then conservative the next to fix the economy.

I think most countries would be a lot better off if they just dropped this right-left division, and let people vote for the candidate they felt best represented their views.

[Fyron]

Spectarofdeath said:
So liberty and equality = rich live like kings and poor homeless..

Red herring. The only people that are actually homeless are those that have already given up. Noone that makes an effort to live a decent life falls that far. Do you have an actual argument to present?

the way it is now the pop. vote is pretty much discarded (to my knowledge anyway).

No it isn't. The popular vote determines who gets the electoral college votes in each state. There is simply a false dichotomy presented about the nation-wide popular vote in the simplified electoral college "debate" as presented by various politicians. Its important in a strong centralized system of government where provincial governments are simply subdivisions of the national government, but that is not what we have in the US. How the national popular vote goes is irrelevant in the confederation style of the US, where the federal government is elected piecemeal by the states. This piecemeal nature defines everything about the entire governmental structure of the US, and you can't just arbitrarily pull out pieces of it like a Jenga block tower.

[Randallw]

Fyron said:
So are you saying we should allow the christian fundamentalists to destroy science education by putting ID as a first-class member of biology class? We should deny human beings rights based on sexual orientation, just because some fundamentalists read the Bible incorrectly (along the same exact lines as gender and racial discrimination in the past)?

I don't know what form of ID you are speaking of but the idea that God created Earth is theology not biology. I also don't know what fundamentalists believe. If it's not Catholic or Orthodox I just label it as Protestant and delve no further.

Humanist egalitarianism is not something valid to believe in? Secularism is not a lack of belief in anything, its belief in not governing by an arbitrary organized religion (since that has always lead to tyranny against the other in the whole of human history).

Violence isn't an aspect of religion, it's an aspect of people. People are flawed and ruin whatever they claim to believe in. I've seen advertisments by atheists and their level of vehemence shows me just because they can't believe in God doesn't mean they aren't cruel and vicious. I don't exactly know what Humanism is.

[Spectarofdeath]

Not trying to get into a fight with you. I just feel that if taxes are going to be "equal" across the board then pay and cost of living should be as well. However since they aren't I feel taxes shouldn't be either. If I make 20k a year and 10% goes to taxes that 2000 is going to hurt me a hell of alot more then the 10k that would come out of someone who makes 100,000.00. Sure their paying alot more, but they also have enough to still live comfortably and not have to worry about do I put gas in the car for work or food on the table? Do I pay the medical bills or the utilities bill? I can understand if your someone making something like 55,000.00 or more or really any amount how you feel it's unfair that you have to pay more than others, but put the shoe on the other foot, your the guy making minimum wage working 50 hours a week and still struggling while the guy who owns the place you work for pays the exact same amount as you while making 3-4 times what you make. Shouldn't everyone have a equal chance to live the american dream or should it just be for the wealthy? I'm pretty sure I know the reaction this will have, "everyone has equal chance, they choose not to take it" Not everyone is born in the same area with the same chances and nobody gets to choose what kind of life their born into. Anyway, you either get what I'm saying or you don't. I won't be responding to anymore regarding this subject as apparently a mod is thinking we're fighting (even though I've seen much worse on these forums).

As far as Russia, I'm not going to be too worried unless they go back to communism which I doubt they will do. It's pretty obvious that the whole president-prime minister thing is just a way to get around the term limitations, seeing as how the president is supposed to be his hand picked successor. Maybe we should get them to join NATO?

[Azselendor]

There is only one form of Intelligent Design. And if it gets into our schools, watch 2 things happen.

1.) A generation of the dumbest americans to ever exist.
2.) Endless lawsuits by fringe groups suing the government's education system into bankruptcy to get their religion's theory's pushed into schools. After all, GOTTA TEACH THE CONTROVERSY!

Mark my words, if ID gets in, in months we'll be teaching Lord Xenu in history class, The earth is flat in geography, and teaching other things that shouldn't be taught in schools.

All funded by your taxpayer dollars.

Like that public ally funded islamic charter school in Minnesota.

Secular school systems are a very strong and good thing. polluting it with religious ideology