We have lost our republic

I believe that Obama does what he is told by the funders, just like the rest of the politicians in Washington. All the stuff about abortion, gay rights, immigration, welfare state, Bengazi, IRS, Obama is a communist, etc. are a distraction so we dont see the theft of our republic, our empire of military bases, 1.5 Billion dollar retirement packages for "health care" executives, the total corruption of our government. I know that it has been going on for a long time, but I also believe that the masses are beginning to wake up. We now have the power of the internet and I think that is a game changer. We can stop them if we organize.

The framers of our constitution agreed that the best form of government for us was a republic, which they defined as a representative democracy. Some believe that the common people are too stupid, uninformed, uninvolved, etc. to make the right decisions. That may be true but I think that a democracy is the only morally right system and the only one that can endure. Most people agree on certian moral values. It is part of the evolution of our brain. The people who really run our government are immoral in the sense that they do not believe in these basic values. They are borderline sociopaths.

 

Wow ... That's pretty cool, and I think it is safe to say I now know why we are losing the Republic.
The best part is that you will probably make a lot of friends, and be fairly well accepted in the new Democratic Society.

Good Luck In Your Endeavors

 

Casper, I think that the lobby system is a very big part of the problem and probably the most widely recognized part. But if the people running for office are already pawns of the funders then just controlling lobbying isn't enough, although it would be a great start. But I dont think that we want to get rid of lobbying completely. When I call my senator to express my opinion on a bill, that is lobbying. I wouldn't want to loose that right. What I think is that a persons (including corporate persons) wealth should not determine the strength of their voice in lobbying or electing our government.

 

Thanks BlackSand. A lot of what I am saying here comes from RepresenUs.org, Wolf-Pac.com, and especially Lawrence lessig's videos on Youtube. I urge anyone that is interested in this topic to check these out.

 

You don't sound 11 years old, kid.
But I like the cut of your jib.
Carry on.

 

A republic is an oligarchy, so good riddance. You're brainwashed to worship this fraud starting when you're too young to think for yourself. So it leaves a permanent scar on your brain.

 

You're debating with stunted adults who have the minds of 10-year-olds. So stick around and you'll be able to teach most of the Netwits something, if you can wade through the drool and the sputter from pompous pontificaters who haven't had an original idea since their Mommies first parked them in front of a TV set.

 

I'm a lot older than 11 Joe. I was just having fun with Guru Jmpet. Thanks for the encouragement though.

 

prometh, not according to my dictionary. please explain if you care to.

 

I thought this was a good topic to read and this is what I see?

I have reported you for every post you've made harassing this new member. Whether or not he says he's 11 or 31; is irrelevant. You're not a mod and it's inappropriate for you to be doing this.

Thank you, flounder for getting on this so fast.

I empathize with the mods for having to police a site this large because the nastiness and trolling is overwhelming. It must be a thankless job.

 

Nonsense of course. Go look up Republic and try again.

 

Actually it DOES matter if someone is 11 or 31... big difference. This person was in kindergarden six years ago! If I am wrong on this one, then I really have nothing worth contributing to this forum because if well written posts are ignored and little kids' views are entertained on a toxic site like this then I really worry about the future...

 

Incorrect. We lost our Republic to Democracy in 1913 with the passing of the 17th amendment.

I do have a question for you, though. How are corporations doing anything that the government has not allowed them to do.

I've used this analogy before. Who corrupted whom? Did the John corrupt the the whore by offering to pay her for sex or did the whore corrupt the John by seeking his money by offering sex for his money?

Here is the answer. Corruption doesn't matter, fault matters. If the John didn't exist, then the whore would simply find another way to make easy money. If the whore didn't exist in the first place, then the John would be forced to find sex in a more legitimate way.

 

We've lost it to vote-buying and apathy. Freebies, gimmees, lack of people PAYING ATTENTION to what's going on in govt on a daily basis.

I think people talk about this stuff a lot, but it may not show up that much in the searches because people don't tag their threads.

 

I'll bet most people don't know what the 17th amendment is, so....

Prior to that, Senators were chosen by the state legislature and had terms of 6 years in length, as they do now.

 

Stermgeist, why do you say that our republic was lost to democracy?

Why do you think that direct election of senators is a bad thing?

 

hahahaha.

 

We have entered an age where people freely vote themselves money at the expense of others and clear sentences in our constitution are being ignored and others plucked from space and found somewhere between the lines.

 

That type of lobbying is fine and there is no reason to restrict free speeh but we have to limit the areas the government can get itself involved in otherwise we are doomed
To always have people willing to try to bribe away a piece of the pie DC is dishing out.

 

Beyond what Johnmayo stated, our republic is supposed to maintain state sovereignty. This is even freely stated in article iv of the constitution and clarified by state's rights in the 10th amendment. Without the ability of the states to elect or appoint Senators, they lost power to the federal government, and the federal government now has the ability to trump state rights by the popular vote of citizens.

Democracy essentially killed the republic by streamlining power to the federal government and destroying any serious notion of state sovereignty.

A democracy can easily be manipulated by playing to the emotions of the majority. In essence, your handlers have you thinking exactly what they want you to think, that someone else is the bad guy. This way you can vote more power to the federal government by abuse of the majority, whoever that majority happens to be.

Hahahaha.

 

I need to look up your references in the constution regarding state sovereignty. But my dictionary says: sovereignty= supreme power or authority. I don't really see how that should apply to state governments. In general, I don't think everything it says in the constution still applies well to the modern U.S.. The FF's were just men after all. I don't think that they even dreamed of what the world is like now. It is my understanding that the senate was created so that states with low populations would not be completely powerless in the government. I don't see how direct election of senators violates this idea.

It seems that you are among those who believe that the people should not be allowed to rule themselves - for their own good of course.

 

It wasn't my intention for anyone to believe that I was 11 years old. If I had said 7 years old instead, it probably would have had the effect I intended, which was to tell Pitt Bull Guru Jmpet that my age was irrelevent and none of his business. Sorry.

 

A republic limits power to a few hundred "representatives," which makes it easy to control through campaign-finance bribery. It would be too expensive for the ruling class to bribe enough people if the people had the right to vote on the laws. Electing is not voting; it is a forced choice between pre-owned candidates who will do all your voting for you. In other words, the citizen is put in the position of a child who has his parents make all his decisions for him. Dictionaries serve the ruling class, so you won't get many real-life definitions from that source.

 

Disagree.

We have lost our republic to people who think nothing of trampling on individual freedom, the Constitution and the rule of written law.

 

True, however I believe it is possible to reform our laws and/or constution to eleminate this bribery,

Do you propose that every law be decided on the votes of citizens who care to participate? Is this practical?

How can people have a meaningfull conversation or debate if they don't agree ahead of time on the meaning of words?