Let's look at Republican successes

1. Chevron, which has gained billions from a variety of shenanigans involving government subsidies granted to create jobs, have managed (they say) to create a miserable 2000 jobs since 2004.

2. Seen on American national TV, a Republican mouthpiece addressing an interjector thus:

"Monkey, I'm not talking to you. Shut up, Monkey."

3. Three trillion dollars in corporate reserves (and growing) held fast from the business of creating jobs.

4. 50 million Americans with no health insurance.
46 million below the poverty line.
Millions, yes millions, losing their homes.

And the Republicans actually want more of this.

 

It's wrong to say that this is what Republicans in general want...

There are millions of moderate and mid right republicans that actually know what they are doing, such as Ron Paul and others.....The problem is that these people are held back by the far right leaders of the party, and almost completely ignored by the Conservative media.

 

Then tell me why you have allowed them to dominate the narrative.

 

Maybe those Republicans who don't agree with the obveous Republican agenda should form that "third" party everyone keeps talking about.?
The problem with that is it would be to small to hold much clout in a democracy.

Face it, the current Republican party is fractured into too many different ideals, and the only reason it's keeping it together is for the pure sake of power, not for the sake of the people.
The one thing all Republicans agree on is they want to be in control.

 

America's only salvation lies in two basic things.

1. Taking corporate money out of politics.

2 Creating a political environment in which the ideas and wishes of ordinary people can find genuine political expression. That means more representation in congress through a greater proliferation of political parties.

If the Libyans can do it, why can't Americans?

 

I can tell you made a completely unbiased and well thought out list here. Good Job.

Hahahahahahahahahahahah no.

 

Libya has fewer tanks?

 

Well I can’t really disagree with that Awryly, and you know that, but you’re trying to solve the problem with logic, and there is nothing logical about American behavior.

Why can’t Americans do what the Libyans did?
Well it took 40 years for it to happen in Libya, and I think we are just starting to get a taste of what their country has been through. The problems in Libya are not really over yet either, there is still a chance for a extremist or tyrant to seize power there.

As for us Americans, I can say we have been lazy, compliant, and have not really suffered much in that time, so this is something new for us, and a lot of people still are not effected enough to really grasp the magnitude of how bad things have gotten right under their noses.

Tolerance is one of our greatest traits, and for a lot of years we have had the attitude of live and let live, so nobody really cared if someone else was excessively rich or wealthy, because most of us could still live a good life.

Even Obama, which I know you can relate to, was not prepared for how nasty the power grabbers have become. His liberal, democratic way to do things was to recognize the people who got left out during his succession to the oval office, and he didn’t ignore them or shut them out, he tried to offer them a place at the table, he tried to work with them.

When we had a majority of Democrats in the House of Representatives, he and the Democrats bent over backwards trying to offer modifications to the health care bill that would be acceptable to the Republican party, and they watered it down, took out the public option, included limitations on abortions, all for the sake of the Republican party.

Not 1 single Republican voted for it. Idealistically, for the sake of showing the better way, Obama did the right thing, but not 1 iota of that fact mattered to the Republicans, so we didn’t get a very good health care bill, the Republicans teamed up with the Tea Party to take back control of the House, and now they sit there blocking every sensible effort Obama or the Democrats make.

Only now is Obama starting to fully understand the mistake he made in trying to be bipartisan with his MORTAL ENEMIES! What he did would be like the Jews trying to cooperate with the Nazis! They don’t care about anything except their hatred of Obama and the liberal/progressive mind set, and how it knocked them out of power.

That’s why logic is a nearly worthless tool in dealing with people who just want to stab you in the back. That’s the problem in this country right now, reasonable people keep trying to be rational while the money mongers are trying to put us in a cage. The top 2% are taking over the whole country, and the average person is still trying to go through the system.

 

I find this a tad funny.. The pro gun lobby work on the plan that if their government is deemed corrupt they will rise up and take control. Wasn't this one reason the right to bare arms was written into the American Constitution?

 

What?

Dominate the narrative? Seems to me Owebama gets more air time than all the Republicans all together. If the subject matter being put forward by the Republicans is taking precedence it's because any other alternatives are either incompetent or unworkable.

Barak Owebama has the most powerful publican relations machine behind him, along with the incredible power of the White House, an institution that makes some other world leaders pause.

If the Republicans have been dominating the debate its because the Democrats have nothing worthwhile to say.

It is astonishing how the Owebama camp transfers responsibility for everything to anyone but who should wear it.

 

Please study some international history. While I agree the two party system has severe limitations in the US, take a look at places like Italy which has, I think nine parties represented. For that matter take a look to the North and the six party system in Canada. It sure slows things down, confuses the issue and delays progress.

Your solutions are so very over simplistic and poorly conceived.

 

Delays progress???????

You must be joking.

This from an American whose political system is in deadly gridlock.

And a multi-party system works just fine in New Zealand.

 

No, that is more democratic, and nothing slows. More visions are represented. That is good.

Is much better than the bipartisan system. Bipartidism is almost the same than monopartidism, and USA is close to monopartidism. Republicans and Democrats serving to the same master.

And there are not delays. LOL. Seriously the fear to democracy from many Americans is incredible. All the time defending the status quo, where the powerful control everything, it is like the slave defending the master, and what is worse defending that being slave is good.

 

The political system is in deep sh!t at the moment in Australia. We have a hung parliament where a couple of independents hold power. Very little is getting done as bills and laws are bounced around both houses of parliament.

 

Too many republicans here?

 

Yes. Occasionally a multi-party system throws up uncomfortable oddities, as the independents in OZ have.

But it has not hamstrung your parliament.

The carbon tax still got through. Whether you like it or not.

 

So you think it needs to be more complex to work?

My problem with the Whole “party” factor is just because someone is in a specific party does not mean they represent anything in that party. Jim Hightower has run as a Republican and he’s almost more liberal minded than me, while Joe Lieberman ran on a Democratic ticket for years before become an “Independent”, and he was right beside/behind G.W. Bush 99% of the time.

Frankly, parties confuse people, and people need to pay more attention to the individual candidates real issues and policies, so you either need more parties to represent a wider spectrum, or you need to drop the “party” game all together.

I’m going to add a few extra points to Awryly’s idea here,
Getting the MONEY out of politics would be a major aid in cleaning up the whole thing, so that means we should totally ban lobbing and all financial contributions from any group or organizations to campaigns and “gifts”.

It’s not hard to establish that it would be a fair fight if all candidates had a cap on how much money they could spend for their campaigns, and since they already use some tax money for that, make sure both get an equal amount and let them raise the rest in “private” contributions only. Once it’s full, the rest should have to go to charity or something of that nature.

With no lobbyists, and no excessive campaign money, the motive of the candidate would be much more focused on the o job and their duty to their constituents.

I think the 2 party system would work well enough if it was allowed to work as a true democracy, and a true democracy means the “majority rules”. Right now, that is the biggest problem, because even if anything gets through the House of Representatives, it’s get’s filibustered by someone in the Senate.

Regardless of which party has more members in the Senate, there are 100 seats, so if 50 vote 1 way on a bill and the other 50 vote the another, the vice President is supposed to cast the tie breaking vote. That should be the process by which all legislation moves forward, but that filibuster process is wrecking it right now.

As it is, 1 Senator can object to a bill and demand it has a 2/3 majority. The Republicans have used this relentlessly, and all it does is stop progress. Some people have portrayed the filibuster process as some kind great tool used by heroic people to prevent bad laws from getting made, but the fact is it is simple obstruction of Democracy. The knife cuts both ways because it IS being used by bad people to stop good laws from getting passed.

For better or for worse, good or bad, Democracy should be allowed to function as such.

Finally, we need to do away with and/or get rid of the electoral collage in Presidential elections, it is obsolete, corruptible, and totally anti Democratic to a country that is supposed to be a Democracy.

All these things would simplify the process and the problems at hand.

 

You need an American President to finish the job............and the country.

 

I do not think that candidates aligning on issues and forming parties where they have common interests is a bad idea.

Let's face it, the electorate is pretty dumb. And when in the assembly, the voters would have vast trouble following the idiosyncracies of individual representatives - even if they could be bothered.

But taking dirty money out of politics is critical.

We have largely done that.

They can still support political parties but only to a limited extent and their support is transparent.

 

You have not established that Chevron is "Republican", that being said if they didn't need more than 2000 more jobs why should they create them? Tell me what companies you invest in that make it a habit of hiring more people than they need.

Are you talking about Allen? What does his getting smeared for a funny line have to do with "Republican Successes"? Want to read some Biden gaffes?

Prove it is all being held by Republicans and they are perfect free to withhold further investments while we have an amature in the White House threatening to tax away the profits and painting them as evil for earning it in the first place. Who is their first obligation and whose money is it they are charged with managing responsibly?

So Obamacare is not working so well along with his stimulus failure and total inept handling of the Democrat mortgage bust.

No we want more of the Bush/Republican economy of 2003-2007. 52 months of full employment, rising revenues, failing deficits down to $161 billion.

Then the Democrats took control of the Congress and the budget.

 

isnt this the same argument they use against muslims? If muslims dont condemn every small bit they dont like, they all follow it?

Using the same logic republicans alll support this.

 

Me>> You have not established that Chevron is "Republican", that being said if they didn't need more than 2000 more jobs why should they create them? Tell me what companies you invest in that make it a habit of hiring more people than they need.

Please answer what I asked you.


Me>> Are you talking about Allen?

When you DO know what you were talking about get back to me.

Me>> Prove it is all being held by Republicans and they are perfect free to withhold further investments while we have an amature in the White House threatening to tax away the profits and painting them as evil for earning it in the first place. Who is their first obligation and whose money is it they are charged with managing responsibly?

What is a not ordinary American?

Actually before and the Democrats refused to do anything about it and then they took over the Congress in 2007.

Who don't actually matter.



Three words. Blue. Dog. Democrats.[/QUOTE]

Three words, Pelosi and Reid and Obama. Two more Frank and Dodd. The Democrats took control of the purse strings in 2007 (2008 fiscal year) that included Senator Barak Obama who was a full member. They then got the White House too in 2009.

This is THEIR economy.

 

"Good idea, wrong game."

Good post, and very true. You have said, very well, things I have been saying (and will continue to say) for years.