|
Post by killer on Jan 18, 2007 11:29:22 GMT -5
We all complain about what's happening. But what else are we doing about the problems? It's great that a few will take the time to send an e-mail or make a phonecall to their representatives -- that is, at least, some effort. And I realize that just surviving out here is a full time job for most people.
But do you think that there will come a time when we actually ban together with words/actions and demand change? Will we ever come together and stick together and do whatever is necessary to get the change we know is needed? Or will we be afraid of leaving our comfort zones?
|
|
v
Newbie Cog
Posts: 26
|
Post by v on Feb 1, 2007 10:19:24 GMT -5
i don't bother with contacting my elected officials because I didn't vote for them and I can't threaten the "i won't vote for you" threat because it doesn't hold any water.
I think we need a total overhaul of our government and I'm about to make a new thread about this.
|
|
|
Post by galaxygoddess on Feb 1, 2007 11:27:30 GMT -5
*smacks forehead at V
|
|
v
Newbie Cog
Posts: 26
|
Post by v on Feb 1, 2007 11:50:45 GMT -5
keep smacking. It won't make you anymore valuable in this conversation.
|
|
|
Post by galaxygoddess on Feb 1, 2007 11:52:49 GMT -5
Nor will it you, but it's sure how your pointless babblings make everyone feel.
You contribute nothing but whining. Please. if you hate the country so much, move to france or something. Yeesh.
|
|
lovinusa
Cog in Training
God Bless the USA
Posts: 78
|
Post by lovinusa on Feb 1, 2007 13:11:55 GMT -5
i don't bother with contacting my elected officials because I didn't vote for them and I can't threaten the "i won't vote for you" threat because it doesn't hold any water. I think we need a total overhaul of our government and I'm about to make a new thread about this. so tell me v whats your plan oh yea, get on forums like this one belittle everyone, b**ch about how bad it is, and... thats pretty much it oh i forgot ... blame Bush for the color of the sky Good plan (she says sarcastically)
|
|
|
Post by W.O.M.I on Feb 2, 2007 20:22:49 GMT -5
That just proves Bush really is an idiot.
If he really did mandate the color of the sky, shoudn't he pick Red?
He can't even get that right.....
|
|
|
Post by killer on Feb 16, 2007 21:34:19 GMT -5
Will we ever come together and work for the changes that are needed? Or are we too far gone and divided? Will we be afraid of it costing us something ?
|
|
|
Post by W.O.M.I on Feb 16, 2007 23:39:57 GMT -5
killer-
In alot of ways, I really hate to post what I'm about to post but, if nothing else, I am brutally honest about saying exactly what I think.
If the US comes together ideologically, it will do so under a Democrat President.
Now it'll have to be a true moderate Democrat or at least one that can be sold to the masses as a moderate, much as Bill Clinton was in 1992. I see no such personage among the Democrats running right now (Bayh perhaps is a true moderate but I don't think he could get nominated).
Not only will he- or she- have to be (at least perceived) moderate, but they'll have to be a great communicator, a'la Reagan or, yes, Clinton. Obama has the communication skills but he's not moderate in his views or votes.
The reason that I say it will have to be a Democrat is that the base of the Democrat Party won't vote for a Republican no matter what, snce the base and those who write the big checks are so far Left now they're basically socialists. Howard Dean is still their kind of guy.
But Republicans will cross over and vote for a candidate that they believe is a moderate. Now true the base won't...but the base is shrinking, in numbers if not (yet) in influence.
Look at the frontrunner for the '08 Republican nomination- Rudy Guiliani. Aside from his stalwart stance in the War on Terror, he could easily be a moderate to slightly liberal Democrat. He's pro-choice, pro-gay rights and pro-gun control. Those three positions are anathema to the traditional Conservative and/or Republican viewpoints, yet Rudy is clearly the Republican frontrunner. Right now- and admittedly it's very early- it's not even close.
If Republicans nominate another Bob Dole in 2008 (while I admire the man, his heroism and his voting record, he was perhaps the single most ineffectual major party candidate of the last 100 years), I could see more than half of the Republicans defecting to support a moderate Democrat for President.
Not only that but look at what the Republicans in the House at least (admittedly, House Republicans have their parliamentary hands tied to a far greater extent than those in the Senate) and, to a slightly lesser extent in the Senate as well have done since the '06 Midterms. They have shown a far greater degree of willingness to compromise (surrender?) with the Democrat majority than Democrats did when they were in the minority. The natural response of Democrats when in the minority is obstruct, obstruct, obstruct; that of Republicans is comity and bipartisanship. I say, better no bill than a bad bill and I hope Republicans will take that advice to heart.
OTOH, I see little evidence that the Democrats would nominate a moderate or, indeed, anyone who might be inclined to be the least bit conciliatory to the Republicans. The Democrats in charge now are motivated soley by power....first off obtaining it (done), expanding it (working) and retaining it (pending). If they want to win the support of the DailyKOSsacks, DemocratUnderground and MoveOn.org crowd, they have to stay on the attack against Republicans, not showing any bipartisanship at all, which the NutRoots would see as a sign of weakness. Like I said: Howard Dean is their man, not Joe Liebermann.
So we have contrasting problems facing the parties.
A Republican who could be elected can't get nominated, while a Democrat who could get nominated can't get elected. One side or the other is going to have to check their principals at the voting booth curtain. I suspect I know which one will do so.
|
|